HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1)
2018-11-13 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Office for the Ageing (Adult Safeguarding) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

Mr COWDREY (Colton) (16:10): I am continuing my remarks with regard to the Office for the Ageing (Adult Safeguarding) Amendment Bill. I have given some context into the drivers behind this bill and touched on the fact that Adelaide's western suburbs have some of the highest percentages of ageing population in the whole of Adelaide and Australia. I also touched on the importance of proactively changing our language in relation to this cohort in reshaping views and perceptions around ageing.

In general terms, I think it is readily accepted in today's world that we are living longer than we ever have and that we are healthier in our old age than we ever have been. People are working longer and later into life. Grandchildren are coming along later than perhaps they were a generation or two ago—that is what my parents are repeatedly telling me, anyway. More of the population now falls within this cohort, and that is yet another driver for this legislation: it is so important to protect them.

To put into context the availability of options for people in this cohort, removing the cost of screening checks for volunteers is also associated with this age group. Many individuals have given so much to the community throughout their lives, and I certainly hope that that number continues to increase over time as we make that easier. In regard to the work by the former government in this area, we obviously note the work of the Office for the Ageing over that period of time, and also recognise some outcomes of that work, including the establishment of the Global Centre for Modern Ageing, which aims to be recognised as a world leader of modern ageing into the future.

As we discuss the change in and importance of language regarding this cohort, it reminds me of a similar shift in language around disability. We have moved away from 'disability' to focus on ability. In line with the NDIS transition, we have had a renewed focus on goals and what people can achieve. In the same way, we must always be cognisant that the language we use in this house is incredibly important. It can be empowering and influential and, most importantly, it can make a difference. I believe that part 2 of this bill certainly positions the Office for the Ageing to be successful into the future and to accurately represent the cohort of people who are captured and serviced by the office for ageing well.

In regard to the operational aspects of the bill and the development of the unit within the new office for ageing well, I think others who have made contributions have provided an overview of the role and functions of the office and the safeguarding unit. It is important that this agency is approachable. The community should feel comfortable in reporting. There is no mandatory reporting provision, but it is necessary that every report is followed up, that there is action on any complaint or issue that is forwarded to the office and the unit and that those issues are followed up by people with appropriate skills in that regard.

We have also discussed the implementation of the unit at some length. We know that, this unit being the first of its kind in Australia, we do not have lessons learnt from other jurisdictions and we do not have a framework to follow in this regard, so there is going to need to be a large amount of consultation and engagement as we put together the framework, guidelines and charter for rights and freedoms for vulnerable adults as we move forward. It is an important part of any process but certainly more important than most in this particular instance, where we are quite literally creating something from the ground up that has not been done before.

In relation to the key recommendations from a number of the reports that were put forward, there are issues that are frequently raised both in our electoral offices and in the community more broadly. Many of those fall, as the Attorney rightfully addressed, around power of attorney issues, but there are certainly others that are brought forward to our offices fairly often. Just this week, somebody came forward and reported issues in regard to an elderly gentleman living in a nursing home in the area. He raised concerns that he believed he was being overmedicated and that this had been happening quite regularly. He is obviously worried about that. These are very serious concerns that he has.

The bill is seeking to provide a mechanism, a clear framework and a clear point of contact for those in the community who are in vulnerable situations to easily raise their concerns in an appropriate manner and know and have the clear understanding that those concerns will be followed up. We also know that, prior to this legislation coming forward, there was not a clear direction or framework in regard to how reports of this nature were done. We obviously have a range of agencies responsible for different aspects that would potentially be reported. Many of those are law enforcement agencies, but others have different responsibilities.

The key part of this bill is that the unit within the Office for the Ageing will be responsible for organising and putting together the right people to work together in a multiagency way to ensure that these complaints and issues are brought forward. This was a gap that was identified in a number of reports: the Closing the Gaps report, the Australian Law Reform Commission's inquiry into protecting the rights of older Australians from abuse and the final report of the joint committee of this place on matters relating to elder abuse. This is a positive response to each of those reports that found this gap in the community and found this gap in regard to keeping these vulnerable people safe.

Unfortunately, it is a sad reality that too many older Australians experience some form of abuse, whether it be physical, financial, sexual, chemical, neglect or emotional. Most often the persons who are perpetrating the abuse are known and trusted by those vulnerable people. For every abuse reported, there are likely more instances that go unreported. Given the bipartisan support and contributions made so far, everyone in this place wishes that the instances will reduce in number, but, if it is the case that they do transpire, that they are able to be reported effectively, and that those who have undertaken the actions and activities are held to account. The bill contributes positively to this goal. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (16:19): I rise also to support the bill. The bill is a piece of legislation yet again fulfilling a commitment of the Marshall Liberal government. It was brought before the other place by the Minister for Health and Wellbeing and passed on 23 October this year. I listened carefully to the remarks of the member for Kaurna and welcome the support of the opposition in the enacting of the bill.

In the time that I have available to me, and having listened to the debate and the contributions of others, particularly in relation to part 3 to part 7 of the bill, I want to take a moment to focus on the refreshing and updating of part 2. As has been noted, the bill considerably amplifies the Office for the Ageing Act 1995, which, as its name indicates, is an act of long standing. As initially enacted, the Office for the Ageing had a number of objectives and functions, and they are to be found in sections 4 and 5 of the act, respectively.

While introducing the new adult safeguarding unit and provisions in relation to that much-needed response, in particular to recent events, the bill also updates those objectives and functions as well as the name for the office, namely, the office for ageing well. The new name of the office also aptly reflects the name of the responsible minister, the Minister for Health and Wellbeing. That directly reflects the objective of the government to ensure that, while there is a substantial focus in this legislation on safeguarding vulnerable adults and ensuring that there is a thoroughgoing process for investigating and acting upon incidences and circumstances, the office for ageing well has a renewed set of objectives and functions to carry out its objectives with a new vigour.

With this legislation, we will continue to seek the objectives of supporting South Australians of all ages to age well, to do so unencumbered by stigma and discrimination and, as far as possible, ensure that those within our community who are ageing do not have their skills and experience lost to our community needlessly but, rather, are as fully as possible respected, valued and participating members of our community. I will say a little bit more about that in a moment.

However, parts 3 to 7 of the bill deal with less happy circumstances, and a response to the particularly unfortunate circumstances that have been described as recently as February this year by the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption as the subject of a scandal and a shameful chapter in our state's history, and that is the events at Oakden.

It is important that I refer to those events in the context of parts 3 to 7 of the bill, if only briefly, to highlight that among the key findings of the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption was that ministers with responsibility—not just the much-maligned minister Vlahos but also minister Snelling—failed in their duty, not so much by actively taking measures that were the subject of appropriate severe criticism but primarily because they did not know about what was taking place when they should have known.

It was inactivity and a failure to be aware of circumstances that they should have been aware of that was very much in the fore in terms of findings, and that goes back several years. We know that minister Snelling was told of neglect back in 2014, several years ago, and that while there was some modicum of inquiry in relation to the advice received the key point was that a level of inactivity and unawareness ensued so that these events were able to continue to transpire.

In the end, the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption found that, while consecutive health and mental health ministers—ministers Vlahos and Snelling included (and this is a matter that was reported at the time, of course)—were responsible for the conditions at Oakden, as were the chief executives in SA Health, they were also, in the commissioner's words, to an astonishing degree unaware of what was going on there. Ironically, that led to a conclusion that they were not guilty of maladministration as a result of that unawareness and inactivity.

The independent commissioner, unsurprisingly, found that to be an astonishing state of affairs and that they ought to have known. As far as that was concerned, a very important part of the outcome of the inquiry was that steps must be taken so that these things do not occur again for want of oversight, activity and monitoring. We see in parts 3 to 7 of the bill that we are now very much in territory where we are providing for structures of active oversight for those vulnerable adults who, over years past, unfortunately, and particularly at Oakden, have found themselves the victims of serious abuse—never to be repeated in this state, one trusts.

There is a much-needed focus on ensuring that what we do now is about active oversight and taking responsibility for safeguarding vulnerable adults. That is, importantly, parts 3 to 7 and has been the subject of much of the debate in relation to the bill. I commend it, and it is high time that this was made part of the subject matter of the office for ageing well and the act in this context. Against that background, I want to return to my earlier remarks, particularly in relation to the updating and the reinvigoration of part 2, because there is a substantial and ongoing positive story to tell about ageing well in our state.

It is very important that we celebrate, honour and respect those who are ageing in South Australia and that we recommit ourselves to ensuring that they do so fully participating in all aspects of life in our state. The Marshall Liberal government fulfils an election commitment to be proactive in relation to the welfare of vulnerable adults. It further recommits itself to outcome-driven measures, rather than simply celebrating a series of inputs or considerations or reviews, that have real effects on creating the circumstances in which those ageing in South Australia can live and participate as very best they can.

Community, of course, is at the core of all this. When we look at the new provisions of part 2 and at the objectives and functions of the office for ageing well, we know, particularly on this side of the house, that community and ensuring strong, vibrant and empowered communities are core to all that we do and very much run hand in hand with legislation that has these objectives as well. Community, community initiative and community strength all go together.

We also think of the sorts of structures and lifestyles within which those who age in South Australia find themselves living. There is a need to ensure that throughout the state we provide proper aged-care facilities and proper facilities for those senior citizens in our communities to be able to associate, socialise and so on. These are matters that are, in part, properly the subject of state and federal cooperation. I am proud as the member for Heysen to commend this bill to the house and all that it does to reinvigorate the life and wellbeing of those who are ageing in the community. That runs hand in hand with the whole range of other measures that we have enacted so that those in all our communities throughout South Australia are able to live and operate as vibrantly as they possibly can.

Key examples are to be found in Strathalbyn, where, as you know, Mr Acting Speaker, there is a wonderful, tight-knit and strong community that, going back decades, sought to provide a home base at the centre of the town of Strathalbyn for its ageing citizens, members of the community as they aged. More than three decades ago now, the community decided that they would get together and do something about it.

They raised funds to build Kalimna Hostel, and that is an institution of which the community has been proud over many decades. As I have said before in this place, at the beginning of last year the previous government, sadly and without community consultation—apparently without any realisation of what it was doing—precipitously closed Kalimna Hostel with the result that residents were sent in all directions, including some to the hospital and others to distant parts a long way away from their community.

We have taken steps very promptly as a new government to make good on commitments that we have made to ensure that we right that wrong and that we reinvest in Strathalbyn and the community to ensure that not only is that facility reopened but we make substantial new investments in a new aged-care facility. That is with the cooperation of the federal government. I was very grateful for the hard work and effective work of our candidate for Mayo, Georgina Downer, in the lead-up to the by-election to secure funding—in both the 4 September state budget and on the federal side—to ensure that that facility is as good as it can possibly be, as good as the evidence tells us it needs to be, to provide for the community.

We are committed to ensuring that those who are ageing in South Australia are ageing well. To the extent that that can be enhanced by legislation, part 2 of the bill is a reinvigoration of the commitment to those operations and functions. I commend the ongoing work of the office for ageing well. In the short time that is still available to me, I make the observation that it is with some irony that we talk about the long-serving volunteers, the long-serving work of those who are to be found in the community, often in the category of ageing. Long may they continue to volunteer. Long may they continue to be at the core of our communities. I commend them, and I commend this bill to the house.

Ms COOK (Hurtle Vale) (16:39): I want to make a brief contribution to the safeguarding adults bill. The abuse of vulnerable adults, particularly elder abuse, has been the focus of many media reports and dozens of parliamentary inquiries across the country in recent years. I hope that this legislation at least helps to bring this disgusting behaviour to an end in South Australia and empowers our community to do something more finite about this ongoing scourge.

It is despicable that there are people in our community who actually have it in them to abuse people of any age, but to abuse vulnerable people—who often have no capacity to defend themselves, speak up for themselves or communicate with others—is the worst thing imaginable. I just cannot find it in myself to understand the why or the how of this. Having worked in health care for a few decades, I certainly am not naive and know that these things happen, sadly. I have seen the consequences.

The heinous abuse inflicted on Clarrie Hausler was dragged out into the open and shone a light on elder abuse in 2016. I worked for many years at Flinders Medical Centre with Noleen Hausler. I have spoken on this topic several times in this place. Noleen was a neonatal intensive care nurse, looking after the tiniest, most vulnerable little people we have—500 grams of baby. Noleen has an eye for detail, is extremely determined and filled with a lot of empathy. Thankfully, all those qualities eventually proved to be the downfall of the worker—I will not use the word 'carer'; I will use the word 'worker' because, sadly, this person was getting paid to do this—who chose to choke, shove, force-feed, sneeze on and suffocate Noleen's dear father, Clarrie, who was aged 89.

Noleen filmed this abuse with a hidden camera. She was not satisfied with the following up of the reports that she had made. Knowing Noleen, these reports would have been incessant. She would not have given up: she would have been constantly raising these matters. Her father had changes in his behaviour and bruising—clear consequences of physical assault—and he often had very bloodshot eyes from crying. You would feel heartbreak as a family. My mother-in-law has dementia—thankfully with none of these symptoms when we see her. However, I cannot imagine the feeling of heartbreak and desperation in a family member entering a care facility to find their delicate father clearly in distress.

She filmed them with hidden cameras. Her gut feeling was right, and with her own eyes she saw the events on the film that she had obtained. The rest is history. The ABC's 7.30 Report broke that story with vision that frankly made me sick to the stomach. I know that in this place we all felt exactly the same, and we talked about it the day after that came to fruition. The then MLC, the Hon. Kelly Vincent, already had a referral in place for the Social Development Committee to investigate the abuse of vulnerable adults. With her cooperation, we moved to start a joint select committee. We refined that and brought the terms of reference together more tightly to focus on elder abuse.

With the great support of people in this parliament and also in the department known as the Office for the Ageing, they did a fairly reasonable job over 12 months of bringing in witnesses and hearing about elder abuse and the types of elder abuse in the community. The Hon. Stephen Wade of the other place and the member for Torrens joined us on that committee, as well as the retired member for MacKillop and the Hon. John Gazzola MLC.

We had a fairly tight committee that looked into a whole range of things and took evidence because, while these pieces of abuse that were shown to us on video were confronting and sickening, elder abuse and abuse of any type can be wide and varied and, sadly, damaging but not so obvious. We went through a whole range of discussions about financial, sexual, emotional and physical abuse and really uncovered the evidence. It was similar in its findings to many parliamentary committees, in that financial and emotional abuse is actually the most prevalent and, sadly, invisible, highly controlling and damaging form of abuse in our community.

Another sickening thing is that it is most likely to be inflicted by somebody who is known to the victim and who is in a position of trust. It is disgusting and heinous behaviour towards very vulnerable people who are frightened to report. That is one of the other things we heard about and one of the things that worries me a lot.

Only the other day, I was invited to visit somebody in a facility to talk about standards of care and what is happening with training in the sector. She was a woman who was very eloquent but suffering from a significant degenerative illness and worried for her future as somebody who, in only a few months' time probably, will not be able to report things so easily and communicate.

For people who are vulnerable and people who are deteriorating with illnesses, who have worries and concerns, we must as a parliament assure them that we are here supporting legislation and processes to make sure that they will be safe, that their voices will be heard and protected and that, if they do need to report to us, we are there to listen and to make sure that they are safe from any consequences following that. That was all I was able to say at that particular visit, but I will make a regular visit and give her that confidence to know that we are around to help. I know that other MPs in this place do the same thing.

It is not just age that puts people at risk of abuse. There are of course also young people with disabilities, communication deficits and mental health problems. There is a whole range of people who are subject to a high risk of suffering abuse. We need to make sure that these people with disabilities, health problems, cultural circumstances and language problems are all listened to and supported and that the processes that are put in place through this bill are workable and are easy for the public to understand.

We need to make sure that the sector understands their obligations in terms of what is right and just for people and how the processes can be managed. That is the one thing in the bill that I want to watch and provide feedback on as time goes on. I will be listening to people in my community to make sure that it is workable.

As with child abuse, I think that neither the bill nor the safeguarding unit itself is going to stop abuse; we as a community must take an active role in that process. The bill will go a long way to assist that by setting out some clear parameters. As a parliament, we have to ensure that enough is done for our community so that it is educated, and we have to ensure that the associated departments are adequately resourced to be able to regulate and deliver on what the bill expects.

With the shadow minister for ageing well, I look forward to having conversations about how this is going, monitoring it, providing feedback to the government and being constructive because we are on a unity ticket with the government around making sure that everybody in our community is safe and that particularly vulnerable people can age with dignity. It has been a long journey to deliver this bill. I know that there have been many reports, investigations and tweaks done along the way, so I congratulate everybody who has worked on this bill. I have listened to some of the contributions, too, and I think that some people in this place have some valuable insights.

I look forward to working together to make sure that the brave families who have shone the light on the abuse of their loved ones are honoured, and we give thanks to all of them. Noleen, Clarrie would be very proud of you because of your determination and your resolve. To the families of the victims of Oakden: thank you. We are also grateful for the work you have done to shine a light on what is a heinous set of events in your family's lives. With that, and knowing that another step is being taken toward the safety of vulnerable people in our community, I commend the bill.

Mr PATTERSON (Morphett) (16:51): I rise today to support the Office for the Ageing (Adult Safeguarding) Amendment Bill 2018. Legislative reform is required to protect vulnerable adults, particularly the state's senior citizens, who are often the most susceptible to some form of abuse. This bill is another example of the government fulfilling an election promise. We made a commitment to develop adult safeguarding legislation, with the bill to be tabled in parliament within the first 100 days in government. This bill was tabled on 20 June and passed the upper house on 23 October.

This is an important bill for the people in Morphett. We know that South Australia has an ageing population. In particular, western Adelaide has a high percentage of people over the age of 65, and nowhere more so than in Morphett. If I can take the time to refer to the 2016 census, it shows that a significant percentage of people living in Morphett are over the age of 65. The state average is around 18.2 per cent. Compare that with the suburb of Glenelg, which has 28.3 per cent.

Other significant suburbs are Glenelg South, which has 27.5 per cent of the population aged over 65; Morphettville, which has 25.4 per cent; Somerton Park, which has 25.5 per cent; and Novar Gardens, which has 23.2 per cent. Not far behind is Glengowrie, with 22.7 per cent of the population aged over 65. You can see that a high percentage of the Morphett population is over the age of 65. A bill such as this, which seeks to protect the rights of people over the age of 65, is certainly very important to them.

If I go a bit deeper into the data concerning some areas of Morphett that have a high concentration of people over the age of 80, one example is the Somerton Park Retirement Village, close to Diagonal Road and Oaklands Road. The percentage of people in the surrounding area over the age of 80 is 45.6 per cent. The member for Black and I went there for morning tea last year, and families and grandchildren had the opportunity to come along and visit. It was a fantastic experience for residents to have that contact with their families, and also for the families to see their loved ones. It is important to them and to their families that they are looked after.

In the electorate of Morphett, there is also Charles Young Aged Care on Austral Terrace, Morphettville. Around 45.2 per cent of people living in the surrounding area are over the age of 80. I attended high tea at the facility on 3 October and was welcomed by the residents. It was great to hear their stories. They worked very hard throughout their lives and we as a community need to protect them. Not far away, on Oaklands Road in Glengowrie, near the Hazelmere dog park, over 38.6 per cent of people are aged over 80. A lot of them are based in the Glengowrie Retirement Village, where they also welcomed me for afternoon tea.

On Moseley Street in Glenelg South, people live in the Kapara nursing home and at Murray Mudge, which is further up Mosely Street and close to Jetty Road. Again, I seem to have a lot of morning tea, but it is certainly a great way to meet and value these people. Eldercare Allambi is another aged-care facility in Glengowrie. I was lucky enough to turn the first sod on that development—

An honourable member interjecting:

Mr PATTERSON: I was; it was my first picture with a hard hat. I felt like a politician at that stage. It was four years ago.

Mr Pederick: Did you have a high-vis vest?

Mr PATTERSON: I did. The feature was that the shovel was silver and had never touched dirt before, so I cannot take much credit other than that first sod. It is a beautiful, light-filled facility and a lovely place for people to live. It is important that their rights are protected while they live there.

I will touch on another aspect of the bill: the abuse of vulnerable adults. Abuse is unacceptable in any circumstance. Alarming statistics reveal that one in 20 older Australians has been a victim of some form of abuse, whether it be physical, sexual, financial or emotional. An example of elder abuse that is on the rise stems from wealth held by older persons in superannuation funds. Elder abuse of a financial nature may include using deception or threats of violence to coerce an elderly vulnerable adult to contribute, or to withdraw or transfer, their superannuation funds for the benefit of the abuser. Improperly influencing superannuation investment decisions might also be abuse.

Another example is pressuring someone to make or change their will. In some cases, this can be financial abuse. As people age, enduring powers of attorney may be needed. There is a JP in my office, and one of the services offered by them is to verify witnesses of enduring powers of attorney. It is incumbent on JPs and others who cite these documents to make sure the older person is entering into the agreement of their own free well. In her contribution, the Attorney talked about investigating reform around enduring powers of attorney at a later date.

Elder abuse is often at the hands of someone they know and trust, usually a family member. Unfortunately, numerous incidents of abuse go unreported, and it is estimated that for every report, there can be up to five incidents that have not been reported. The legislation before us today is in direct response to issues that were identified in the Oakden Older Persons Mental Health Service and will provide much-needed safeguards for vulnerable adults. In his report, the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption stated:

[Oakden] represents a shameful chapter in this State's history.

It should not have happened. It must never happen again.

For the purposes of this act, a vulnerable adult is defined to be an adult person who, by reason of age, ill health, disability, social isolation, dependence on others or other disadvantage, is vulnerable to abuse. Clause 4 defines abuse of a vulnerable adult in a number of ways, including:

(a) physical, sexual, emotional or psychological abuse of the vulnerable adult;

(b) financial abuse or exploitation of the vulnerable adult; and

(c) neglect of the vulnerable adult; and

(d) abuse, exploitation or neglect consisting of a person's omission to act in circumstances where the person owes a duty of care to the vulnerable adult; and

(e) the abuse or exploitation of a position of trust or authority existing between the vulnerable adult and another person.

From this, you can see that age is not the sole determinant of a person being potentially vulnerable to abuse. There are other factors that make a person vulnerable, which may be ill health, disability or dementia. Age, when combined with one of these factors, makes a person potentially vulnerable to abuse.

I mentioned that one of those factors may be dementia, and it is important that all of us in this house try to help raise awareness and highlight the importance of supporting those living with dementia. This morning, the members for Waite and Hurtle Vale hosted a session in parliament run by Dementia Australia to help us, as decision-makers, be informed. Further to that, last September the member for Colton and I held an important information session about dementia for some of the senior citizens in our community to help identify the signs of this insidious disease and also how carers and loved ones can help support those who are living with dementia.

Also coming up this month, the member for Colton and I are also running a cybersecurity information session for people in our community to try to help inform them about how they can protect themselves at large from financial abuse. It might not be from family members or loved ones, but certainly from criminals who are predators and try to take advantage of elderly people and the fact that over their long, hardworking life they have accumulated funds. With electronic devices these days, those funds can just evaporate in a matter of minutes if protections are not put in place.

The bill takes into account the recommendations of the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption's inquiry into Oakden. It also takes into account recommendations of other state and national inquiries into elder abuse, including the Closing the Gaps report and the Australian Law Reform Commission's inquiry into protecting the rights of older Australians from abuse. In 2011, the Closing the Gaps report recommended the introduction of adult safeguarding legislation in Australia. It states:

The present legal framework… provides protective frameworks for serious cases of abuse and for those who are particularly vulnerable due to mental illness or incapacity, but it does not provide a framework for less intrusive methods of intervention, or early intervention, and at a time when serious abuse or neglect could be avoided.

Former senator and attorney-general of Australia the Hon. George Brandis QC asked the Australian Law Reform Commission to conduct an inquiry to consider commonwealth laws and legal frameworks and how they might better protect older persons from misuse or abuse and safeguard their autonomy. This report was tabled in federal parliament on 14 June 2017.

The inquiry itself was based on the principle that all Australians have rights, which do not diminish with age, to live dignified, self-determined lives, free from exploitation, violence and abuse. The commission inquired into the regulation of a number of areas, including financial institutions, superannuation, social security, living in care arrangements and health.

The bill before us establishes a new adult safeguarding unit, which is to be located in the office for ageing well within the Department for Health and Wellbeing. Part 2 of the bill provides for the name of the Office for the Ageing to be changed to the 'office for ageing well'. This is indicative of the government's commitment to combating ageism and challenging the language used around our senior citizens and their healthcare needs.

The new adult safeguarding unit will provide much-needed support and safeguards for the vulnerable citizens of South Australia. It will be an approachable empowered body, with a statutory responsibility and accountability to respond to reports of the abuse, neglect or mistreatment of vulnerable adults, especially the elderly. The unit will focus on the prevention of abuse of vulnerable adults through raising awareness and increased community education, but it will also be responsible for the assessment and investigation of suspected abuse reports. These incidents will then need to be referred to the appropriate bodies or persons, or the unit will work in collaboration with other agencies to devise a collaborative approach to particular concerns.

The bill places the rights of the vulnerable adult at the centre of any measures or interventions aimed at safeguarding. Often, our more vulnerable senior citizens' rights are taken away and they are treated as if they are incapable of making decisions. This bill aims to empower those vulnerable adults who experience abuse or neglect with a decision-making capacity to choose their own support in cases where no immediate harm is posed. For the purposes of the bill, clause 5 provides:

…a person will be taken to have decision-making capacity in respect of a particular decision unless the person has impaired decision-making capacity in respect of the decision.

The bill then goes on to define impaired decision-making capacity in respect of a particular decision if the person is not capable of understanding any information that may be relevant to the decision or retaining such information. This ensures that vulnerable adults who are still in a position to make decisions about their life and wellbeing are able to do so. This is an adult's right and should be extended to those vulnerable citizens who are often overlooked in this process.

In some cases, vulnerable adults may feel uncomfortable contacting the police regarding matters that involve their family or friends. As a result, the legislation ensures that people with a decision-making capacity have the clear right to refuse support and assistance, which will protect privacy and guard against unwanted intrusion. In cases of serious abuse, authorised officers, including the director and certain other employees of the adult safeguarding unit, are given information-gathering powers to assist in the investigation of abuse reports.

This authority also includes the power to require a person to answer questions and produce documents. This power is in line with the recommendations of the Australian Law Reform Commission's inquiry into protecting the rights of older Australians from abuse, which held that these powers should be exercised where agencies have reasonable grounds to suspect serious abuse and are not taken lightly or used inappropriately. Within the bill, an authorised officer is permitted to use force to enter any premises only through a warrant issued by a magistrate or, in urgent circumstances, with the approval of the director.

In part 4 of the bill, clause 20 provides for a charter of rights and freedoms of vulnerable adults. This clause requires the minister, with the support of the office for ageing well, to publish a charter of the rights and freedoms of vulnerable adults. The charter will be developed in consultation with vulnerable adults, their carers and families. Regulations and a comprehensive code of practice will also be developed, which will then outline in a detailed and practical way how the act is to be implemented and, in particular, how the agencies will work together to fulfil their obligations under the act.

Importantly, the bill provides for the review of a decision of the adult safeguarding unit or the director by a person aggrieved by a particular decision. This is a significant element of the bill and an overall process in fostering transparency and accountability of decision-making, which is another commitment that this government made in the election. A review can be undertaken by the chief executive in the first instance, and then reviewed further externally through the Ombudsman if appropriate.

As other members have mentioned, this legislation is the first of its kind in Australia and will work closely with SAPOL to minimise harm through early intervention and a multidisciplinary approach to protecting our most vulnerable citizens. It is proposed to stage the implementation and operation of this act after it is proclaimed. The decision review process will not come into operation until 12 months after the commencement of the act, and the safeguarding provisions will apply only to vulnerable adults aged 65 years or older or, if they are Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander vulnerable adults, 50 years or older, and this will occur for the first three years of operation.

The bill provides for an independent review of the operation of the act to be undertaken within its first three years of operation to ensure that the legislation is meeting the needs and expectations of the South Australian community. The state budget of 2018-19 provides $538,000 in 2018-19, rising to $756,000 per annum by 2021-22, for the establishment of a new adult safeguarding unit.

South Australia has seen cases of abuse that go beyond simple neglect to outright abuse in the past, and this government does not wish to see our most vulnerable being treated in this manner, hidden away and overlooked. The bill demonstrates that the government is committed to helping people age well and live dignified, self-determined lives, free from exploitation, violence and abuse. I commend the bill.

Mr McBRIDE (MacKillop) (17:11): I rise today to speak in support of the Office for the Ageing (Adult Safeguarding) Amendment Bill. The ability for the elderly in our community to live their lives free from elder abuse should be a fundamental right for elderly citizens. These people deserve to live their lives with dignity and independence. The Liberal Marshall government has recognised this and has introduced this important bill to the house fulfilling—

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis interjecting:

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Duluk): Order!

Mr McBRIDE: —that'll do—its electoral promise to protect our vulnerable adults. In support of this approach, the state budget for 2018-19 provides $538,000, which will grow to $756,000 per annum in 2021-22. It is unfortunate that, in this day and age, our elderly can be subject to abuse. The elderly may be vulnerable by virtue of age, ill health, cognitive dysfunction, dementia, social isolation or dependence on others for care.

This is the opportunity where I can now leave my notes and talk about how we as citizens and representatives in this house can represent particularly this sector of society, the aged and elderly in these care systems. Old age is something that none of us really, once we reach the age of 20, is aspiring to get to in a hurry.

There is no-one I have seen go along to an aged-care centre and see that the centre is absolutely beautiful, immaculate and that they are looking after the elderly, and say, 'I really can't wait to get here. This looks so good.’ This is not a part of life about which I think the citizens of our society are saying, 'This is where we have to get to in a hurry.' In fact, all I hear is, 'I wish I wasn't as old as I am because I want longer at this before I get here.'

However, the fact is that as technology improves, we are living longer and more of us are living longer as well, and so because of our demands on society, demands on those who are working, and demands on everything that this envisages, our lives are becoming more stressed, more complicated, and it is almost like a new frontier. How do we keep our elderly fit, how do we keep them independent and how do we keep them alive and enjoying those last twilight years?

There are lots of issues that come along once citizens reach old age. Good health is one of those things that we all strive for throughout our life, but there is no doubt that, once you have reached the age of 60 or 70 and beyond, the best friend you will have is a very good GP whom you see regularly. There is only one reason for that: there are things that do not always work like they used to.

As we get older, one of the most important things we strive for is independence. We have been independent all our life until it is taken away from us, and it is usually not by choice. I just want to highlight this. One of the reasons I want to delve into this is to understand that a lot of what has gone wrong and why this bill has had to be introduced is that there are a lot of dimensions to the issues of old age and care that I think we have to make sure we develop, improve, continually improve and continue to assess, and I hope that the bill does that.

One of the things that I would imagine happens is something I saw in one of my relations. Once he reached the age of 90, you would ask him how he was and his common comment to me, my relations and his relatives was 'still alive'. It was not that he was not being looked after, but there was no purpose in living any longer. This is one of the fundamental issues that this bill is trying to cover, as well as a lot of other aspects, I would imagine.

What must be understood about that 'I am still alive and I am still going' is that there is a frustration and sort of anger. You have a gentleman, as he was, in his twilight years, 90 years plus, whose body is breaking down, who broke his hip and whose independence was taken away from him. In regard to his independence at 90 years old, he was self-sufficient. There were a couple of issues that took place that really made him quite irate. For family going along and seeing him, sometimes you could meet him on a good day or sometimes you could meet him on a bad day.

One of the things that happened was that he was shuffling around the streets near his house, going to a shop, and he got mugged. He could barely get up a sprint—he could barely walk—and he had to get over the fact that he now felt vulnerable in society just walking down the street. He was a gentleman who used to dress up in a suit and tie, but it would have been just a mere shuffle with a walking stick down that street. He would have been as vulnerable as anyone could be to someone suspected that he was easy prey. The reason I again bring this up is that these are the sorts of frustrations that show how people can become disillusioned with what retirement and old age are all about. All our technology does is keep him living longer and longer but not in a way that he is actually happy to progress with.

Other factors which come to mind, and which a lot of old-age people suffer from, as the previous speaker alluded to, are dementia and the loss of memory, the ability to think forward and to plan and process. You become more dependent on family, carers, nurses or nursing aged-care centres and again that adds another level of frustration and perhaps pain.

I am describing this at length to the parliament and those who are listening because if you have people in these centres with all those sorts of frustrations and hang-ups in life about what they do not have, they are not the easiest patients in the world to look after. If you then think about the people who we want to work in these centres, do the hard yards and work the long shifts, perhaps 24 hours a day, it is never ending. There would be good days and there would be bad days.

We need those really good, caring people, but they would be very hard to find in society. That does not mean that those who are there are not that way inclined at all, but I think this speaks volumes of why we need a bill like this that absolutely covers off, represents and looks after the frustrated, frail, old, individual who has been successful in all aspects of life and gets to the last twilight years of life. One of the most important things about that is that it feels as though there is no purpose in waking up the next day.

When I saw those video images in the media about some of the violence that was going on, when some cameras were filming some aged-care patients and they caught some ill treatment, it was horrifying. I would hate to think that my relation had to go through any of that. The frustration shown by those nurses and those carers was, first of all, unacceptable, but you also have to see what they are facing and what they have to work with.

The patient I saw was not eating and was getting smacked around. It was totally unacceptable, but if you look at the reasons why that was all masked but there to be seen on this secret video the whole picture was not a good one. It was probably the wrong individual looking after the wrong patient. The patient might not have been hungry. He might not have been enjoying the food, the food might have been vitamised and might have tasted terrible, he might not have felt very well, he might not have been able to communicate that to that carer and the carer was probably told to feed that patient.

If you think about all those dynamics in that patient and carer scenario, it is a difficult situation. This speaks volumes about why we are talking about this bill today and why this government is bringing in a process that covers and cares for these vulnerable people who might not be able to communicate, who might not want not to be where they are, who might be difficult customers to look after; so it will take a special breed of person with special skills, with compassion that may not be found in every person in society.

Again, this comes back to the bill. You need processes in place. We have seen what can happen if the wrong people are in these places and the wrong management is instigated. I will talk about what happened at Oakden a little bit later. You can see how it could snowball out of control and just fester bad management, bad decisions and bad outcomes. Society is getting better at living longer. As people are getting older and living longer, and as care will be needed even more, there will be a requirement to look after these people.

We as a government are doing a great job of lifting the economy. As we are employing people and there are fewer and fewer people looking for work, it is actually going to be harder to find the carers, nurses and the people with trained skills to look after our elderly. It is not just building the facilities and having the beds but having the right people in place and covering all the requirements of these patients.

I talk about the carers. It is not just the carers who fall under this umbrella. Family and friends can be just as hostile. Family and friends can be just as frustrated by their uncle, aunt or parents and may lose patience with whatever they are trying to do to help and feel that they cannot do enough to help that elderly person. Again, I come back to the point that it may be that that person is sick of living, cannot communicate, does not want the help that is being advocated for them. There is a lack of communication and a lack of independence in that care-type scenario, and it is a really difficult one to navigate and work through.

The bill has a strong foundation and picks up on many of the recommendations of the previous state and national inquiries, including the Closing the Gaps report, the Australian Law Reform Commission's inquiry into Protecting the Rights of Older Australians from Abuse, the final report of the Joint Committee on Matters Relating to Elder Abuse and, importantly, the recommendations of the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption inquiry into Oakden, which stemmed from an experience that we want to ensure is never again experienced by our elderly citizens.

When I listened to the Address in Reply, when members came back into the parliament, the other side spoke of their experiences in government. I am going to refer to the member for West Torrens, and I am glad he is here. I want to bring up a few of the words that he used in his Address in Reply. He refers to Oakden:

…I think we got a lot of our policies right but we got some dramatically wrong. I think the Premier was right when he talked about Oakden being a great shame and that it was inescapable. I think every minister in that former cabinet, when reading that report, was horrified to know what was occurring under our watch. It was terrible. No member of this place would say that it was acceptable behaviour...The idea that somehow we did not care or were not interested is simply ridiculous.

I am not trying to ridicule him for these comments, but I think this speaks volumes about why this bill is in place and why we as a government cannot only pretend that we have a great bill; we have to make it work.

We have to be responsible, in the sense that it is one thing to have a bill in place but I also hope we have ministers in place. I hope we have a department in the health system that is monitoring this. I hope all the representatives who are in here absolutely believe that transparency, good outcomes, top performance in business strategy in this elder sector are the only things that are acceptable. Complacency is not acceptable. To be blasé is not acceptable. Just to think that it is going to happen without anyone monitoring or managing is not acceptable. I certainly do not want to belong to a government that says the same things as the previous member for West Torrens said on his departure from his role in government after 16 years.

I think that speaks volumes about the fact that we do not have to reinvent that wheel. We should learn from that. We should always aim for best practice and we should always strive to make things better as our population gets older, as those needs become more demanding and as the technology helps people to live longer. Most importantly, we should ensure that those who are in these systems have the best quality of life so that they are easy to look after and are good patients and so that we can do a better job with them.

The bill enables the establishment of a new adult safeguarding unit. This unit will complement the role of the police and other government and non-government agencies by providing the South Australian community with an empowered body that is accountable for responding to reports of abuse, neglect or mistreatment of vulnerable adults. However, I want to make sure that it is out there in the public eye that this bill is going to be a bit confronting. In other words, I think the bill is absolutely going to try to look after these vulnerable patients in every way, shape and fashion, but it could also be far overreaching and may even go too far in some cases. I am not sure how we police and manage this, but I am sure it is something we are going to develop and work through.

Imagine an elderly patient in a care facility: the family visits regularly—that could be daily, weekly or even monthly—and it is considered, for example, that they are interfering in that patient's life and perhaps making life difficult for that patient. In other words, it could happen that families could be ostracised from relatives and others in these care units because they may be a problem.

The government will have to have the strength and fortitude to say, 'Okay, these are some of the outcomes we have in trying to look after patients, but we are disenfranchising them from their friends, their carers or their families because they are not good for them at that time of life.' We know that this world is not perfect, and we know that there are going to be a lot of difficult cases where we try to advocate for the patient, the elderly person, the person with dementia and the person in their twilight years.

The bill embeds the vulnerable adult as the focus of safeguarding measures. The bill supports an adult's right to make decisions for themselves where they have the appropriate decision-making capacity. That is a really tough one to decipher if you think about that decision-making capacity as people get older: they may suffer from dementia and they may have a lot of other issues in their life. It is going to be a really big grey area, and I hope that we as a government get that right.

Importantly, the bill provides a structured approach to reporting and investigating reports of abuse. It provides appropriate power for authorised officers to enable them to investigate reports of abuse effectively. There are also checks and balances in place to ensure that, where an authorised officer needs to exercise powers to enter a premises, a warrant is needed, or, in urgent situations, the approval of the director is required to ensure appropriate use of these powers.

I have already touched on the powers that the new bill is going to enact. A department will have to be devised to look after these vulnerable patients, directors and inspectors and so forth. It is going to be a fine line. I fully understand what we are implementing, but I also say, in caution, that it can be far overreaching. I think that that is what we have to balance well.

The bill also supports a coordinated and multidisciplinary approach to the management and prevention of elder abuse. The prevention of abuse will be a key function of the adult safeguarding unit. This provides for initiatives that include raising awareness and community education. As already mentioned, the role of this unit will include a responsibility to respond to alleged or suspected abuse, including assessing and investigating these reports and then referring them on to, and/or collaborating with, other agencies to respond to concerns in a way that has the rights of the vulnerable adult as the focus.

The bill provides for staged implementation. I note that this legislation is the first of its kind in Australia. Given this, the planning for implementation is proposed to be staged. I think that actually highlights my concerns that this is going into a new field, a new area. As a state, we have suffered enough under some issues—under the previous government and the member for West Torrens—that we never want to see again. Going into these new fields and developing a new wheel of management has its pitfalls, and I hope we do not suffer them.

The decision and review process will not come into operation until 12 months after the commencement of the act. The safeguarding provisions will only apply to vulnerable adults from the age of 65 upwards, or 50 years for older Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander vulnerable adults, for the first three years of operation. The bill embeds an independent review of the operation of the act within the first three years of operation to ensure that it is meeting the needs of older members of our community and the wider community in general.

I am personally very pleased that this important bill has been brought to the house. It is an important safeguard for our vulnerable elderly community, and I believe that it will make a real difference to their lives and the lives of their relatives. The bill enables a proactive educative approach to be taken to elder care and, when necessary, provides a fair framework to enable investigation and resolution of issues that put the care of our vulnerable citizens at the centre.

As a government, I think that we have the best of intentions for this vulnerable sector of our community. I think that it is going to be a necessary bill. I hope that we make it work in the way that it is absolutely meant to and that it is a great outcome for all our elderly in South Australia in their twilight years. I commend the bill.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (17:31): I move:

That the debate be adjourned.

The house divided on the motion:

Ayes 22

Noes 20

Majority 2

AYES
Basham, D.K.B. Chapman, V.A. Cregan, D.
Duluk, S. Ellis, F.J. Gardner, J.A.W.
Harvey, R.M. (teller) Knoll, S.K. Luethen, P.
McBride, N. Murray, S. Patterson, S.J.R.
Pederick, A.S. Pisoni, D.G. Power, C.
Sanderson, R. Speirs, D.J. Teague, J.B.
Treloar, P.A. van Holst Pellekaan, D.C. Whetstone, T.J.
Wingard, C.L.
NOES
Bedford, F.E. Bettison, Z.L. Bignell, L.W.K.
Boyer, B.I. Brock, G.G. Brown, M.E. (teller)
Close, S.E. Cook, N.F. Gee, J.P.
Hildyard, K.A. Hughes, E.J. Koutsantonis, A.
Malinauskas, P. Mullighan, S.C. Odenwalder, L.K.
Piccolo, A. Picton, C.J. Rau, J.R.
Stinson, J.M. Wortley, D.
PAIRS
Marshall, S.S. Weatherill, J.W.

Motion thus carried; debate adjourned.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT