Bill
Aged Care Legislation Amendment Bill 2024
lapsed, as at 2025-07-21. Health and Aged Care portfolio.
- Sponsor
- Not recorded
- Portfolio
- Health and Aged Care
Recorded stages
- introduced — 2024-10-10
- second reading — 2024-10-10
- second reading — 2024-11-05
- other — 2024-11-05
- second reading — 2024-11-06
- second reading — 2024-11-07
- other — 2024-11-07
- second reading — 2024-11-07
- third reading — 2024-11-07
- introduced — 2024-11-18
- second reading — 2024-11-18
- second reading — 2024-11-19
- second reading — 2024-11-20
- second reading — 2024-11-21
- second reading — 2024-11-21
- other — 2025-07-21
Divisions
- The majority voted in favour of a [government amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2024-11-07.44.1) to remove the subclauses set out below, which means those subclauses will no longer be part of the bill. ### Amendment text > *(1) Clause 158, page 167 (line 26) to page 168 (line 18), omit subclauses (5) to (7).* ### Subclauses (5) to (7) > *158 Advisory body requirements* > > *[...]* > > *(5) It is a condition of registration that a registered provider of a kind prescribed by the rules must offer, in accordance with any requirements prescribed by the rules, aged care workers of the provider the opportunity to establish a body (the quality care worker voice body ) to:* > >> *(a) give responsible persons of the provider feedback about the quality of the funded aged care services delivered by the provider; and* >> >> *(b) give responsible persons of the provider feedback on any other matters prescribed by the rules; and* >> >> *(c) work collaboratively with the responsible persons and governing body of the provider to address any such feedback.* >> >> *Note: A person may make a complaint to the Complaints Commissioner about compliance with this Act: see section 361.* > > *(6) If a quality care worker voice body is established, a registered provider must require the governing body of the provider to:* > >> *(a) comply with any requirements regarding membership of the body and the terms and conditions of members of the body prescribed by the rules; and* >> >> *(b) consider feedback given by the body when making decisions in relation to the quality of the funded aged care services delivered by the provider; and* >> >> *(c) advise, in writing, the body how the governing body considered such feedback.* > > *(7) It is a condition of registration that the registered provider must, if requested to do so by a quality care worker voice body, give the body information about the quality of the funded aged care services delivered by the provider.* — 2024-11-07, House of Representatives: affirmative, ayes 51, noes 8
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr7215_amend_b9d572fa-9f7e-4f9a-ae83-d1e44bfdc3e9%22;rec=0) to the usual second reading motion, which is "*that the bill be read a second time*" (parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill). The amendment was introduced by Farrer MP [Sussan Ley](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/farrer/sussan_ley) (Liberal). ### Amendment text > *That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:* > > *“the House notes the Government must ensure that:* > > *(1) the reporting burden imposed on providers does not outweigh the necessary information being collected; and* > > *(2) all aged care providers are focused on delivering high quality care for our older Australians”* — 2024-11-07, House of Representatives: negative, ayes 53, noes 72
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=chamber/hansards/28073/&sid=0000) to the usual second reading motion, which is "*that the bill be read a second time*" (parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill). The amendment was introduced by NSW Senator [Maria Kovacic](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/nsw/maria_kovacic) (Liberal). ### Amendment text > *At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate calls on the Government to:* > > *(a) revise the transitional arrangements of the Support at Home Program to allow sufficient time for implementation by in-home aged care providers;* > > *(b) provide certainty to the aged care sector through a clear transition path, including implementation information beyond 1 July 2025, recognising the cost, both in staff training time and monetary value, of the measures in this bill;* > > *(c) undertake an extensive education and information campaign about the measures in this bill, targeted at both older Australians and their families and the wider aged care sector, to address the understanding gap clearly articulated throughout the Community Affairs Legislation Committee inquiry;* > > *(d) expedite the design of the Commonwealth Home Support Program (CHSP) replacement program to:* > >> *(i) give aged care providers sufficient time to make necessary changes and to prevent the challenges associated with rushed policy implementation as seen with this bill,* >> >> *(ii) enable providers to undertake ICT changes for both Support at Home and the CHSP replacement program concurrently, and* >> >> *(iii) ensure greater emphasis is placed on the additional value delivered by organisations, such as Meals on Wheels, when determining contracts and pricing for services;* > > *(e) undertake further consultation on care management fee caps and service delivery, including with clinicians, to:* > >> *(i) provide greater transparency about the facto — 2024-11-21, Senate: negative, ayes 30, noes 31
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2024-11-21.6.2) to the usual second reading motion, which is "that the bill be read a second time" (parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill). The amendment was introduced by West Australian Senator [Jordon Steele-John](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/wa/jordon_steele-john) (Greens). ### Amendment text > *At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:* > > *(a) notes that:* > >> *(i) the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety recommended that no person with disability under the age of 65 should remain living in residential aged care from 2025,* >> >> *(ii) while the Government accepted this recommendation, this Bill works in direct opposition to the recommendation by formalising a pathway to place people under 65 in aged care,* >> >> *(iii) there are 911 people aged under 65 in residential aged care who are NDIS participants who should be receiving the disability-specific supports they need to exit residential aged care; and* > > *(b) calls on the Government to implement the recommendation of the Royal Commission and ensure no disabled person under the age of 65 remains living in residential aged care".* — 2024-11-21, Senate: negative, ayes 12, noes 32
Plain-language summary
Written by a model from the explanatory memorandum; not the record, as at 2024-10-10.
This bill would give a senior official the power to check the accuracy of data that aged care homes report to the government.
Approved providers could be ordered to hand over documents or answer questions, and face civil fines if they do not cooperate.
The new checks are based on an existing program that reviews home care data.
- Gives the Secretary new powers to audit residential care data reported by approved providers.
- Allows the Secretary to publish reports on audit findings, conclusions or recommendations.
- Creates civil penalties for providers that fail to comply with audit notices or to provide reasonable assistance.
Approved residential aged care providers and the Department of Health and Aged Care.
Sources
em
billhome