Surveillance Devices (Prescribed Residential Premises) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

The Hon. F. PANGALLO (17:09): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I rise to speak on my private members' bill, the Surveillance Devices (Prescribed Residential Premises) Amendment Bill 2024. As members in this place know well, when I commit to resolving an issue I am a bit like a dog with a bone. This is my second attempt to lift standards to provide for the necessary security and protection of residents in nursing homes and those with disabilities receiving aged-care or disability supports through the installation of cameras and/or listening devices in their own private spaces and rooms.

Members in this place will recall that in 2019 I introduced a bill to have CCTV cameras installed by the relevant providers in all private aged-care facilities and state-run institutions. This was pre-COVID when abuse of our senior citizens in some public and private nursing homes was disgraceful and often covered up and pre the royal commission into aged care abuse, which yet again shone a light on systemic problems and appalling practices in the aged-care sector.

It was post 2015 when Noleen Hausler brought the shocking and sickening abuse of her 89-year-old father, Clarence Hausler, in the Japara Healthcare facility to our attention. Noleen Hausler tried and failed to get staff of the facility to address her concerns, so she installed the camera. To her horror, the camera provided irrefutable evidence that her father was regularly assaulted, mistreated and abused by staff. Ms Hausler knew there was a problem, but she was shocked and horrified at the extent and frequency of the abuse.

It was post concerns being raised in 2017 by Barb Spriggs, the wife of Bob Spriggs, who was mistreated while he was a patient at the now notorious Oakden. Mr Spriggs was admitted to Oakden suffering from multiple illnesses, including Parkinson's disease. He was given 10 times the amount of his prescribed medication and left with unexplained bruises before his death. A subsequent Senate inquiry report into the Oakden facility confirmed that 'poor or inappropriate training' and 'a culture of fear, silence and cover-up among staff' contributed to the mistreatment of residents.

It was pre the death of Ann Marie Smith in 2020 for which 'paid carer' Rosa Maria Maione was charged with and pleaded guilty to manslaughter. Ms Smith suffered from cerebral palsy and was 'cared for' in a home by Ms Maione, who was employed by a registered service provider. Rosa Maione was jailed for at least five years and three months for her criminal neglect.

As with Ms Smith, not all abuse occurs in public or private residential facilities. It can occur in the home of an elderly or disabled resident receiving at-home care services, an arrangement that many people prefer over moving into a nursing home or aged care, that is of course if you can get aged-care support in your home at all.

I was recently appalled to hear about an 86-year-old South Australian who has applied to end his own life because of extended delays with getting aged in-home care support. The situation confronting Cyril Tooze was brought to public attention by my independent colleague the federal member for Mayo, Rebekha Sharkie. Mr Tooze, who has a terminal illness, was approved for the highest level of home care assistance under the federal government's My Aged Care scheme in January 2024 but was told he would have to wait up to nine months to receive it.

Rather than wait in pain for any support, Mr Tooze applied to end his own life using South Australia's Voluntary Assisted Dying Scheme. After publicity for his case, he has been granted temporary assistance. This is simply an appalling situation where someone wants to end their life rather than wait for care.

We know that when care is finally provided it is often substandard or inadequate. Has much changed since the findings of the 2021 Royal Commission into Aged Care, Quality and Safety? Sadly no. That somewhat ironically titled Royal Commission into Aged Care, Quality and Safety, Final Report: Care, Dignity and Respect, did not even canvass the use of CCTV despite such systems being implemented with excellent results overseas. There are only five very high-level recommendations made by the royal commission, all of them very focused on compliance and enforcement.

Abuse and neglect of our elderly, infirm and disabled continues to happen in many aged-care and nursing home facilities and settings around the country. If anything, it has gotten worse since COVID and the royal commission report. I continue to receive complaints every week about substandard care, neglect, abuse, over-medication, under or incorrect medication and terrible food served to residents in some facilities. Despite the wonderful work of South Australian culinary legend Maggie Beer to improve the standard of food on offer in such facilities, the bottom line, not nutritional value, often determines the menu in many facilities.

Families tell me their loved ones are restricted in how many consumables they are provided with, for example, vital things like incontinence pads and clean linen. Only recently, I was sent more photographs of the food—in fact, I will call it slops—that was served up at an aged-care facility in the north-western suburbs. The resident who sent me that just could not eat the food that was presented there—if you can call it food. You just did not know what was there. It was a pile of dark-coloured meaty substance on rice and that was it.

On another occasion, the same resident, and he is 85, had forgotten to fill in his menu form that morning for dinner, so when he turned up in the dinner room, what was served up to him? Two slices of toast. It is not uncommon in that facility for residents to either have sandwiches—vegemite sandwiches—hot dogs (if you can call them that), party pies and pasties, and also, most recently, what they call a pizza, which is basically a muffin with some melted cheese and tomato sauce on it.

That is the standard of food and care that is being given still to aged residents in aged-care facilities. Of course, many of them in those facilities are often afraid to complain. They are just thankful that at least they have a bed and are able to stay there and they do not want to complain about what is going on there, but some do and they bring it to the attention of members of parliament like myself to raise the alarm that we need to be more vigilant and pay attention to what is happening in there. Sometimes even their own families, though many do not get visits from their families, fail to take notice or ask what is going on.

As I said, I continue to receive these complaints. The ratio of staff and carers to residents is still not good enough. The standard of training and the requirements of certificate III and certificate IV are still reported to me as being inadequate. Data shows that three in four aged-care homes face years of financial losses, leading to closures, and 50 per cent say that they are operating at a loss and that it is going to lead to closures. There is also a significant bed shortage.

Standards have fallen because of rising costs and the shortage of trained workers. Profit margins are under pressure and aged-care packages that could support aged and disabled people to remain in their homes are again in short supply, as Mr Tooze found. With an ageing population of around nine million baby boomers aged between 64 and 80, demand is only going to increase and perhaps even outstrip what is available. This is why the federal government is now looking at reforms that will mean that older Australians may have to pay more to access aged-care support.

Shamefully, both Labor and the Liberals refused to back the bill I introduced in 2019. In doing so, unconscionable conduct and abusive behaviour have been able to flourish unchecked in some places. For those of us with memories longer than an election cycle, let us not forget that it was Labor that was responsible for completely ignoring the whistleblowers at Oakden until it became impossible for it to do so.

What we got from the Marshall government in response to my private member's bill of 2019 was a bungled trial in two state facilities, instead of the five facilities the trial was meant to cover, soaking up the $500,000 that had originally been made available by the federal government. Those funds were supposed to be used for a trial of a proven and sophisticated system developed by a UK-based company, Care Protect. But SA Health decided it wanted to go it alone and develop its own system, thinking it would try to replicate Care Protect's copyrighted intellectual technology. It was, as I expected, a disaster.

SA Health contracted a local security firm that had no expertise in aged-care surveillance and installed a handful of unmonitored cameras in only two facilities. The South Australian trial had none of the sophisticated tried and tested features of the UK system that had been rolled out so successfully there. The report that eventually came from the trial yielded nothing worthwhile. It was a waste of resources and a great opportunity was missed—or perhaps, as I suspect, the trial was deliberately set up to fail, as the aged-care lobby would have hoped.

The trial of an inferior, limited system led to claims that there were too many false alarms and that it took up too much of the staff's time to attend to false alerts. We know from the families and workers who have daily experience in these facilities that many of these organisations' management and staff do not want this type of scrutiny.

When I spoke about this bill on the radio recently, a caller texted in, claiming to be an aged-care worker, and said, and I quote, 'If I know there's a camera in a room then I won't be going in there.' What selfish arrogance is that? I wonder what this worker had to hide: why they would actually fear the fact that these cameras were there to observe and ensure that there was a high standard of care being delivered? These workers should have little fear if they are doing their job to an accepted standard.

Indeed, Care Protect reported from their UK experiences that staff like the extra layer of accountability that CCTV provided. They said it worked both ways: they felt their patients and residents were safer and that they, similarly, were professionally and physically protected while in private spaces that had CCTV installed. Aged-care facilities in the UK are continuing to achieve outstanding results and positive outcomes for residents, while here there are still unscrupulous operators who will exploit their staff and look at ways to save money anyway they can.

While there are many aged and disabled residential homes that do have cameras in common areas, unlike hospitals they are not in rooms. What this new bill does is allow families/residents to legally install their own optical surveillance devices—cameras—and audio devices in rooms so that they can keep a check on the welfare and care of their loved ones. The spaces in which they can be installed are clearly defined in the bill to include private rooms in facilities and private residences in which services are being delivered.

Residents, family members and their appointed representatives will need to arrange for and meet the cost of installing the device and covering any monitoring costs, should they apply. As they are responsible for the equipment, they will also be able to best place the device so as to preserve the privacy and dignity of their loved one receiving care. Importantly, they will also be able to tightly control who has access to the footage or the audio obtained. This deals with any opposition to institutions installing and monitoring footage.

They will, however, need to notify the facility in writing of the intention to install the device and remove it and reinstate the room afterwards. There is a requirement to have a sticker or sign that a device is installed at the entrance and within the space so residents, staff and visitors alike know they are in place.

The bill clearly prescribes the use of footage and/or audio obtained and outlines the restrictions on publication and dissemination. It also outlines the need for consent and exceptions to this—for example, if it is in the public interest or disclosed to a legal practitioner.

The bill adds a powerful layer of security and protection for not only residents but also staff. Sadly, dementia and other mental health issues can lead to aggressive residents who sometimes abuse other residents and staff. CCTV will enable better protection, monitoring and management for all residents and staff.

I have been consulting stakeholders continuously on the bill and can report it is strongly supported by aged-care advocacy groups, families and representatives of those in care. I would like to acknowledge the tireless work that Ian Henschke did as an advocate for older South Australians. Ian has retained his strong support for this bill even though he is no longer in the sector. I am confident this bill will also lift the standard of care, as has happened in the UK where CCTV is now widely used and the footage is monitored independently in real time.

We have grown very accustomed to CCTV cameras being used in a wide range of settings in public places and our homes. It has evolved to enable us to access footage and recordings in real time on our phones and to store the content. We are a long way from the grainy, blurry images of early CCTV.

We routinely use CCTV to identify offenders, and it has been critical to solving some very challenging crimes, using footage from within venues, public streets and shopping centres. We also routinely use CCTV to monitor babies and security systems installed in our homes, utilising new technology to add more protection and safety to our lives. We can also use it to monitor and talk to our pets while at work. We are filmed every time we use a checkout at Woolies, Aldi, Coles or Foodland, and we are not required to consent to this; it just happens. I guess we can shop elsewhere, but it is rapidly becoming the norm.

This very simple bill makes it legal for residents, families and all their representatives to install surveillance devices in the private rooms or spaces of residents, whether it be within a residential facility or within their own home, to better protect and secure the wellbeing of our most vulnerable older and disabled South Australians. I hope that members will support it.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. I.K. Hunter.