Senator ALLISON (6:36 PM) —The Aged Care Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 1999 , which we are considering today, introduces a number of amendments to the Aged Care Act 1997 and the Aged Care (Consequential Provisions) Act 1997 to finetune the aged care structural reforms which were introduced in October 1997. In addition, it addresses some administrative and procedural issues which have become evident since that time. It also introduces a number of protection measures for older Australians living in residential aged care facilities, which the Democrats particularly welcome. We are happy to support this bill today.

Since the government first announced its sweeping reforms of the funding and operation of residential aged care facilities in 1996, the Democrats have worked very hard to improve the government's policy reform package. Our goal has always been to ensure that the final package was one which would ensure that the needs of those requiring residential aged care both now and in the future would be met. What we have always wanted is a system which is sustainable while offering high quality care to all Australians, regardless of their capacity to pay.

In determining our position in the aged care debate since 1996 we have carefully weighed up each proposal against its likely impact on the ability of elderly Australians to access high quality residential care and the long-term financial viability of the residential aged care sector. The Democrats gave qualified support to the government's initial aged care reform package, because we understood the urgent need to inject funding for capital maintenance and improvements into residential aged care facilities. We negotiated a number of improvements to the original proposal, including an additional $40 million in subsidies for concessional residents. We wanted to ensure that all Australians could continue to access high quality residential aged care, regardless of their ability to pay for it.

Recently, the Democrats also played a crucial role in paving the way for the introduction of an accreditation system for residential aged care facilities, which was proposed as part of the government's 1996 aged care reform package, with funding for all non-accredited aged care facilities to cease from 1 January 2001. While the majority of aged care providers supported an accreditation process, the details of the legislation were not agreed to until the Democrats brokered a roundtable discussion between providers and the minister. As a result of this meeting, the minister has agreed to address the major concerns of the aged care sector, including making a commitment that residential aged care facilities with up to 19 beds will pay no fee for accreditation, and those with 20 to 25 beds will pay only a tapered fee on an ongoing basis.

The Democrats are proud to have been able to play a central role in resolving the impasse between the government and the aged care providers over the accreditation process for aged care facilities. I believe the introduction of accreditation will be a big step forward for those needing residential aged care. It should lead to continuous improvements in the industry and ultimately a higher standard of care and facilities for older Australians.

On reading the House of Representatives Hansard, I notice that the opposition have used the debate surrounding this bill as yet another excuse to beat up the government on aged care. No doubt, they will turn their attack on the Democrats in the Senate as well. Before the senators in the ALP start with the kind of tiresome rhetoric and half-truths we have heard time and time again, let me just take the opportunity today to remind them that the ALP had 13 years in government to address the problems in aged care, and they did not.

The ALP did virtually nothing, despite the findings of the Gregory report, which was commissioned by the Keating government. The ALP did nothing, despite the fact that its own independent report estimated that approximately $1 billion in today's figures was needed just to get the existing nursing home stock up to scratch. Let us not forget that, when it comes to aged care, the opposition has a very poor record indeed. In fact, it has failed dismally.

Let us also not forget that, going into the last election, the only promise the ALP could come up with in relation to aged care was to abolish all nursing home fees and replace them with $500 million of public money to be paid to the sector over three years. I invite ALP senators here tonight to explain to us exactly how this $500 million was going to meet the current and ongoing funding needs of the aged care sector. In fact, I challenge the opposition to change their approach when it comes to aged care. Perhaps just for this bill, rather than resorting to rhetoric and half-truths to bag everything and everyone on what they have tried to do, why not try something different? Why not use this as an opportunity to tell the rest of us what the ALP aged care policies would be if they were in government?

Before the government gets too complacent from all of this criticism of the opposition's approach to aged care, let me take a few minutes to draw attention to one particular shortfall of the government, and that is the government's lack of response to the findings of the Productivity Commission's report into nursing home subsidies. Despite receiving in January of this year the Productivity Commission's findings that the government's funding index in relation to nursing home subsidies is wrong, the government has failed to give any indication as to when it will respond. We find that unacceptable.

Here, yet again, we have an example of a government setting up its own objective independent body to look into what is to be done in the area of aged care, only to ignore its findings. The whole point of this inquiry was to determine whether the proposed coalescence of nursing home subsidies should proceed or be replaced by another funding methodology. The Productivity Commission did not endorse the government's coalescence proposal. Despite this, in setting nursing home subsidy rates from 1 July this year, the government went ahead with its proposal anyway.

The Democrats call on the government to end the current angst in the aged care sector in relation to this matter today by making it very clear exactly when and how the findings of this report will be responded to. It is worth noting that the findings and recommendations of this Productivity Commission inquiry have wide industry support. The Democrats will continue to work with all of those involved in the aged care sector—both providers and those who represent the consumers of aged care—to achieve an improved level of care for the residents of aged care facilities. As the measures contained in this bill today are supported by all of those involved in the industry, we are happy to support them today too.

The ALP have a series of amendments to this legislation. While the Democrats have some sympathy with the sentiment which obviously lies behind some of those changes, we will not be able to support them, because neither we nor the industry saw them until just a short time ago. As a result, there has been inadequate time for meaningful consultation. Indeed, those whom I have spoken with in the industry have said that they have not had a chance to look at them or consider them in any depth. In fact, they urged us to reject the amendments and not delay the bill.

We will be seeking clarification from the government on some of the issues raised by the ALP's amendments. However, I say to the opposition that they do themselves absolutely no favours when they hand complicated amendments to us—and to the industry—at the last minute. It leaves the Democrats with no choice but to vote against them, because it would be completely irresponsible for us to support changes which may bring with them negative unintended consequences which nobody has had time to consider.