Bills

Ageing and Adult Safeguarding (Disapplication of Transitional Provision) Amendment Bill

Introduction and First Reading

Ms COOK (Hurtle Vale) (10:34): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Ageing and Adult Safeguarding Act 1995. Read a first time.

Second Reading

Ms COOK (Hurtle Vale) (10:34): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

In 2018, the government passed the Office for the Ageing (Adult Safeguarding) Amendment Bill, creating an Adult Safeguarding Unit in response to instances of elder abuse that had been highlighted over previous years, and under the Labor government also. When we were in government, I moved and chaired a committee inquiring into elder abuse, and it came up with a number of very strong recommendations. This committee was triggered by horrific events, including that involving a gentleman at a Mitcham residential care facility, Clarrie Hausler.

Those events were featured on television because his daughter Noleen Hausler had popped a camera into the room, suspecting that her father had been mistreated. I worked over many years with Noleen Hausler when she was a registered nurse. I have deep respect for Noleen, and I thank her for her bravery in setting in motion a cascade of events that has led to a heightened awareness and indeed has culminated in the Adult Safeguarding Unit, which was a recommendation of the elder abuse committee.

It would be prudent to mention that the elder abuse committee was triggered as well by a motion moved by the Hon. Kelly Vincent of another place, back in around 2016 or 2017 from memory. That committee, with members from across both houses, sat over the course of a year and came up with a number of recommendations and shared many insights from evidence that was given by a number of people, including members of the public and experts in the field.

The debate on the legislation that led to the creation of the Adult Safeguarding Unit was supported across all parties and by Independents. Labor successfully moved amendments, enabling the unit to investigate systemic issues related to abuse. This becomes more relevant now as we discuss the delivery and implementation of this particular piece of legislation. The unit responds to all reports of abuse and works closely with other agencies. It has the power to require information and, by court order, authorise assessments of vulnerable adults or require a person to do or refrain from doing something in relation to a vulnerable adult.

I want to talk quickly about vulnerability as a concept, having engaged with hundreds of people in the disability sector, in particular, but also in the ageing population in my community. Many people are fine with the use of the words 'vulnerability' and 'vulnerable' when it comes to applying labels to groups of people, but I have also had really good evidence and representation from many people, particularly young, powerful disabled people in our community who do not feel vulnerable unless it is our policies and practices in the community that put people who are marginalised into the category of vulnerable.

For me, that is really poignant, moving forward, and something that I am taking into account every day as more cases come to light or as people call out for support to strengthen the supports and the oversight of people in marginalised communities. I can tell the chamber that I had many people put representation to me when we were discussing the bus cuts—the bus route cuts and the bus stop cuts—that were being applied broadly across our community.

I had people who live in marginalised communities or who, because of their own condition, are marginalised and require additional supports and our good policy to ensure that they are independent and strong. What we saw was a number of people reaching out to us and saying, 'I'm now vulnerable because I don't have access to transport at a vicinity close to my home. I cannot go a kilometre using a walking frame. It's not easy for me to navigate my wheelchair from one place to another, in terms of getting on and off buses.'

I had many people represent to me their horror at a statement by the Minister for Transport in this place that people had to be able to walk to get on and off buses. That is a fanciful statement from a person who is uninformed about the reality of very strong, very independent people in our community with disability who, in fact, use an alternative method of mobility.

Wheelchairs on and off buses are commonplace. I understand that it is from this week that all of our buses are accessible to people using an alternative method to their feet to get on and off buses, as well as mobility aids while on their feet. I think this is a great thing to celebrate. It was a process of investment, started under the Labor government, and it has now been completed, I understand.

I cannot understand why the government has not come out, other than the Minister for Transport is a bit embarrassed to say that all the buses are now accessible for people in wheelchairs. He said only three or four weeks ago that people could not get on and off buses unless they were walking. I call out to the Minister for Transport to make a statement about people getting on and off buses, the accessibility of our bus network and how great it is for people with disability in South Australia.

They are some broad thoughts about people, vulnerability and policy changes that we might undertake in this parliament that may affect negatively people living on the margins in our community, those who are marginalised and how we can negatively impact them. I think most of us come into parliament in order to make a positive impact and to react and respond to issues and grievances that arise because of people who are marginalised.

In terms of the adult safeguarding bill as it was applied and as we supported, at that time, unfortunately it was put in place with a phase-in approach. I understand the need to start sometimes smaller and build up, so it was not something that triggered any kind of worry for me back then. It meant that the Adult Safeguarding Unit only had jurisdiction over those people considered vulnerable over the age of 65, or 50 years and older for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, during the first three years of operation for the unit, which might not have raised any flags six months ago, but here we have Ann Marie Smith.

Annie Smith passed away on 9 April and I have talked several times in this place and publicly about how the community is horrified by such an incident. We are completely in despair about whether or not there are any other people like Annie who could be in the community. Annie by all reports was cognitively intact and in control of her own decisions. Under the NDIS during the last year or so, which was about power and control of your own choices and the capacity to put in place the care and supports you want under your terms, Annie then found herself in this situation which we do not know all the facts about.

There is a police investigation, and I take care not to talk too broadly about what may have happened or to speculate, but what a terrible event. We have seen a cascade of events where the state government has thankfully triggered at least some quick responses. As to the task force, I have been critical of the number of senior bureaucrats involved in previous years in shaping, overseeing and formulating policy in relation to people with disability in the community. I have been critical of the heavy weight. I understand that a few need to be on there.

People with lived experience account for either half or the minority in terms of the group that is undertaking this review, and I feel that there should be more people with lived experience in the community leading this response. We saw a report tabled more than two weeks ago that had some recommendations. We have heard commentary by the minister in the other place, Michelle Lensink, regarding the capacity to respond quickly to some of these recommendations, but we have not seen any response as yet.

In terms of this piece of legislation, the Adult Safeguarding Unit was provided information regarding Annie Smith's death on 9 April but they did not take further action, it was reported and recorded after questions by, I believe, the Budget and Finance Committee. It did not take further action as it had no jurisdiction because this particular community member, Annie Smith, was under 65. The unit would not have had jurisdiction to respond if anyone had reported information about Annie earlier, when Annie still had a chance when she was in her home.

The task force has tabled an interim report recommending the expansion of the adult safeguarding role, and the Minister for Human Services indicated in a statement to parliament that this action could be immediately taken. We say: what could have happened in the last two weeks? What could happen in the next three weeks until parliament sits again? In fact, if this does not get through and happen more rapidly, what could happen before the end of this year? We have the winter break coming up. This is not a complex piece of legislation; this is a tiny tweak to the numbers—a tiny tweak to what can be done. I do not see this being an enormous financial burden. I do not see this being complex and difficult.

The opposition is introducing the Ageing and Adult Safeguarding (Disapplication of Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill 2020 to remove this phase-in approach so that adults who find themselves in a vulnerable position can immediately be reported. They can have reports made, they can report, they can get support from the state government under the Adult Safeguarding Unit immediately. The unit would be allowed to investigate instances of abuse in any adult regardless of age.

This bill will not bring Annie back—nothing we do will bring Annie back—but we can do so much, including strengthening the Community Visitor Scheme immediately. We can put this legislation in place so all adults are subject to the support and care from the Adult Safeguarding Unit and we can at least tick those boxes while we work on a deeper cultural change for the care and support of all people in our community, particularly people who are marginalised. I know that we do not need to make partisan comments about that because we all care about people in our community who are marginalised.

I know that deep in the hearts of those in government, as well as those in opposition and the Independents, they want to do that as quickly as possible, so I urge the government not to be partisan on this and help to pass this bill quickly and get it through the house. It will not bring Annie back, but over the course of weeks and months we could save other lives. I commend the bill to the house, and I seek leave to have the explanation of clauses inserted in Hansard without my reading it.

Leave granted.

Explanation of Clauses

Part 1–Preliminary

1–Short title

2–Amendment provisions

These clauses are formal

Part 2–Amendment of Ageing and Adult Safeguarding Act 1995

3–Insertion of Schedule 1

This clause inserts after section 54:

Schedule 1 – Transitional provision

1–Disapplication of transitional provision

This schedule removed the transitional provisions which only applied this act to those people aged 65 years of over, or 50 and over if Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander.

This schedule therefore means any adult over the age of 18 years which was to apply from 2022.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Pederick.