Senator NEAL(3.42 p.m.) —I move:

That the Senate—

(a)   notes, with concern:

   (i)   the failure of the Government to protect the interests of older Australians,

   (ii)   government policies which have resulted in growing levels of economic insecurity for older Australians, including a decline in job opportunities and forced early retirements,

   (iii)   the massive transfer of funding responsibility from the general community to older people which will result from implementation of the aged care changes on 1 October 1997,

   (iv)   that the new aged care measures will, for the first time, link access to care to income rather than need, and

   (v)   that older people will have to bear a disproportionate share of other government cuts and charges, such as those to pharmaceutical benefits, home and community care, superannuation and redundancy payments; and

(b)   calls on the Government to reconsider its policies for older people and, specifically, to reintroduce capital funding for nursing homes, thus removing the requirement for entry and extra daily fees, with the hardship this is causing older Australians and their families.

The motion that is before the Senate today deals with a matter that is of particular concern to me—that is, the treatment of the elderly by this government. I have the privilege of residing on the central coast of New South Wales where many people who are elderly have travelled to retire and enjoy all the benefits and pleasures that a seaside lifestyle at Penrith prices provides.

Since the election, and with all the things that have occurred, they have been telling me very loud and clear that life is more difficult for them now than it has been for a very, very long time. The elderly in the Australian community are being hurt in very many ways: the provision of health services—including dental health, hearing services, pharmaceuticals and hospital funding—the failure of this government, despite their promises, to do anything about private health insurance; the changes to social security; and the restriction of benefits, particularly the requirement that older Australians access their superannuation at age 55 before they can get unemployment benefits, even if they intend to go back into the work force.

The general attitude of the federal government to unemployment impacts also on older Australians as many people between the ages of 50 and 60, who previously enjoyed that decade in making a final contribution in the work force, now find that there is no place for them. They have also cut grants to state governments, which means that a whole range of services—including the funding of public hospitals and the services which our elderly people used to rely upon in order to have a lifestyle that, I believe, they are entitled to expect—are no longer available to them.

I have to say that, for me, the cruellest, the most distasteful and the most vicious of all the things that have happened in relation to elderly people is what has occurred with our nursing homes. Nursing homes are those things that all of us would like to avoid. We all hope that we will go into old age healthy and happy and able to enjoy all the things we would have liked to have enjoyed when we were younger but did not have the time. But the reality is that, for many people, as they get older their health deteriorates, and quite markedly for some people. For this group of people—the elderly, the very unhealthy and the frail—nursing homes are not an option; they are an absolute necessity.

People do not go into nursing homes for a holiday. They do not go there because it would be a bit of fun to visit a nursing home. They go there because they have no other option. The vast majority of people who now reside in nursing homes—and, I believe, the group of people that will continue to reside in nursing homes—are frail, elderly women who have chronic illnesses. It is this defenceless group of people which this government has decided to single out for particular punishment.

As from 1 October 1997—this is why it is important to have this debate today to emphasise the issue—they will have to pay up-front fees for nursing home care if they have, in the opinion of this government, assets from which to pay, and that includes their family home. The only limitation on the amount of fees that are payable is that, after a lifetime of contribution and hard work, residents will be left with the princely sum of only $22,500. It is really quite appalling.

I remember that when this issue was first raised in this chamber we heard extensively from Senator Newman about how we were exaggerating about the size of these up-front fees. When we used the figure of $27,000, Senator Newman said that we were using scare tactics—her favourite term—that we were scare mongering and that, in fact, the fees would not be anything like that. I suppose in the usual situation of politics, some people might have thought it was true that we were exaggerating. But let me tell you: what we predicted was far below what the fees have turned out to be.

During the Senate community affairs inquiry we took extensive evidence from all sorts of people involved in the nursing home industry. In particular, we heard from those who are suppliers of nursing homes, those people who run the business of providing age care. We also heard from the churches in particular that provide nursing homes on a not for profit basis. That second group of people assured us that they would attempt to still cater for those people who could not afford it. But they said that the situation was made extraordinarily difficult because of the paltry amount of money that this government was prepared to offer to subsidise disadvantaged residents.

I have digressed for a moment. I go back to the evidence that was given to us about the size of the fees. We received evidence that, on average, the entry fee for residents who had to pay fees would be $40,000. That is well in excess of anything the minister has ever conceded. That is not where it stops. Some providers of nursing home care went even further. They said that, in fact, some fees in some of the more salubrious nursing homes—I suppose you are a bit unlucky if you have only those sorts of nursing homes available—would be well in excess of $100,000.

It is a very sad situation when these elderly and frail are not able to get access to nursing homes unless they have that sort of money available. Also, from 1 November 1997, every nursing home user will pay a daily fee of 25c per dollar earned outside the pension free area—effectively, a tax of 25 per cent. The end result of this system of up-front entry fees and daily fees will be the development of a two-tier system of aged care.

This is the proposition that the Howard government is providing for our aged and our elderly. There are two groups. There are the well off that can go to well-appointed nursing homes, maybe of the standard of a five-star hotel, or not too far off. They will be well cared for. There is a second level for those who are not so well off, who do not have those sorts of assets, who do not have that sort of money available to them and who do not potentially have affluent members of their family who are prepared or able to bail them out. Those people will go to the second tier of nursing homes—those starved of resources. It is a very sad situation when those are the options that are being provided for our elderly.

I mentioned at some length the other nursing home changes that occurred and how they affect our elderly people. But I suppose I have not really talked about how all these changes affect elderly people, what the pensioners in Woy Woy and in every other area of Australia feel when they see these sorts of changes occurring. You might think you have got away with it. You might think these people have not noticed. To some extent they have not felt the full impact yet because a lot of the changes do not come into effect until this year and some of them not till next year or even later.

The elderly people in our community feel that they have contributed a great deal during their lifetime. Many of them have gone through the Depression, have gone through world war, have seen economic recession and now see many of their children and their grandchildren unemployed. On top of all that—the difficulties and problems—they now see a government that does not care about them and is in fact prepared to punish them in trivial and callous ways.

I have dealt mainly with the nursing homes. My colleagues will deal with some of the other areas that I listed earlier. Let me sound a warning: if you believe that the elderly of Australia will lie down and take this and they will not tell you how they are affected the next time they go to the ballot, you are very much mistaken.