Higher costs for older people
Critics argued the bill would make many older Australians pay more for aged care, particularly self-funded retirees and some part pensioners, turning reform into a cost shift rather than a fair funding fix.
Aged Care
Current status
This bill became law on Dec 2nd, 2024.
Policy area
Health, care & disability
What does this bill do?
Australia gets a new aged care law that centres older people’s rights and brings home support, residential care and some programs that sat outside the old law under one legal framework.
Why was it introduced?
The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and SafetyThe major public inquiry that exposed serious problems in aged care and pushed for the new law. exposed fundamental problems and recommended a new Aged Care Act. This bill creates that new rights-based law, brings more aged care programs under one framework, and strengthens provider rules, standards and oversight.
Broader context
Before the bill, Australia’s aged care rules were split across older legislation and some funded programs, including home support and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flexible aged care, sat outside the main Act while the government was also reshaping provider oversight, service standards and older people’s rights. After consultations throughout 2023 and 2024, the bill was introduced in September 2024 to replace that patchwork with one rights-based law covering home support, residential care and stronger regulation, then passed Parliament in November and received Royal Assent in December 2024.
Key criticism
The strongest criticism was that the bill could shift more aged-care costs onto older people, especially self-funded retirees and some part pensioners, while leaving key pricing and transition details unclear. That case was pushed most clearly by Coalition speakers, while some crossbenchers and conditional supporters focused more narrowly on gaps in safeguards, enforceable rights and how the scheme would work in practice.
Who supported it?
Hon Anika Wells MP introduced this bill. It passed with support from Labor, Liberal Party, Australia's Voice, Nationals, some crossbench members; opposed by Greens.
Introduced in House 12 Sept 2024
Passed House 07 Nov 2024
Passed Senate 21 Nov 2024 Aye 27 No 6
Became law 02 Dec 2024
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 02 Dec 2024
Final passage
Recorded final vote
1 counted final-passage vote was recorded.
Passage speed
81 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
Australia gets a new aged care law that centres older people’s rights and brings home support, residential care and some programs that sat outside the old law under one legal framework.
-
Older people using home care can get new Support at HomeThe home care program in this bill that helps older people pay for equipment, home changes, recovery care and end-of-life care at home. funding for equipment, home changes, end-of-life care at home and short-term recovery care after illness or injury.
-
Residential aged care homes must have at least one registered nurseA qualified nurse who must be on site and on duty in residential aged care homes at all times under the new rules. on site and on duty at all times, giving residents round-the-clock access to clinical care.
-
Aged care is mainly limited to people aged 65 and over, with access from age 50 for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness.
-
Residential providers cannot keep taking yearly retention charges from a resident’s refundable depositMoney paid by a resident that is meant to be returned later, minus any allowed deductions. once those deductions reach 2 per cent of the original deposit for that year.
Show source excerpts
-
The Bill establishes a modern rights-based legislative framework that focuses on the safety, health and wellbeing of older individuals and places their needs at the centre of the aged care system, with funding and regulation of programs targeted for the benefit of older individuals, their families and carers. The Bill will provide legislative authority for the delivery of funded aged care services to individuals under the Commonwealth aged care system, including those programs which were previously outside the scope of aged care legislation such as the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Flexible Aged Care (NATSIFAC) Program and Commonwealth Home Support Programme (CHSP). The funded aged care services which are to be delivered under the Bill will be prescribed in an aged care service list that sits within the subordinate rules made under the Bill. These services will be grouped into a variety of service types which are to be delivered by registered providers through service groups.
Aged Care explanatory memorandum -
The calculation method for subsidy for the provision of home support services will similarly be based on the needs of the individual in line with an individual’s classification level. The arrangements will also provide for subsidy to be paid in respect of registered providers who deliver assistive technology and home modifications funded aged care services to individuals, including those with a disability and/or with progressive conditions, to ensure they have a higher standard of living in their home. The end-of-life pathway will provide a higher level of funding for individuals who have been diagnosed with less than three months to live and would prefer to die in their own homes, in recognition of the increased need for services and support during this time to ensure a higher standard of living. The restorative care pathway will also provide additional funding to deliver multi-disciplinary allied health programs for up to 16 weeks to ensure a higher standard of living. As such, the new arrangements for
Aged Care explanatory memorandum -
The Bill also requires registered providers to ensure that at least one registered nurse is on site and on duty at all times (that is, 24 hours each day, 7 days each week) at each approved residential care home operated by them. This promotes the right to health by explicitly requiring and strengthening the obligation for quality clinical health services to be made available to individuals accessing funded aged care services at a residential care home at all times (clause 175).
Aged Care explanatory memorandum -
The right to health under the Bill is restricted to individuals who are eligible to receive funded aged care services. The Bill provides that only individuals with care needs who are age 65 or over, or age 50 or over and an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person or homeless or at risk of homelessness are eligible to undergo an aged care needs assessment by an approved needs assessor (clause 58). This is because the aged care system is only one part of a broader system of care and support in Australia. The intent is that individuals who do not
Aged Care explanatory memorandum -
(1) Clause 308, page 304 (after line 18), after subclause (4), insert: (4A) A registered provider must not deduct a retention amount from a refundable deposit balance in any one year period if the sum of all retention amounts deducted from the refundable deposit balance in that period is equal to or greater than 2 per cent of the refundable deposit. [retention amounts deducted must be less than 2% per year]
Aged Care as-passed bill text
Context
Broader context for this bill
Before the bill, Australia’s aged care rules were split across older legislation and some funded programs, including home support and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flexible aged care, sat outside the main Act while the government was also reshaping provider oversight, service standards and older people’s rights. After consultations throughout 2023 and 2024, the bill was introduced in September 2024 to replace that patchwork with one rights-based law covering home support, residential care and stronger regulation, then passed Parliament in November and received Royal Assent in December 2024.
- 2023 to 2024
Government consults on the new aged care law
Consultation on the bill and the foundations of the new Act produced almost 14,500 points of engagement, including more than 440 submissions and 1,500 survey responses.
Aged Care explanatory memorandum ↗ - 12 Sept 2024
Government introduces the new Aged Care Bill
The bill was introduced to create a modern rights-based framework and bring funded aged care programs that had sat outside the main legislation under one law.
Aged Care explanatory memorandum ↗ - 25 Nov 2024
Parliament passes the bill
Both Houses passed the bill, clearing the way for a single legislative framework covering residential care, home support and stronger provider regulation.
Parliamentary timeline ↗ - 02 Dec 2024
Aged Care Act 2024The new main law that brings home care, residential care and related programs under one rights-based aged care system. receives Royal Assent
Royal Assent turned the bill into law, completing the legislative change to a new aged care framework centred on older people’s rights and provider accountability.
Parliamentary timeline ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 12 Sept 2024
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading opened 12 Sept 2024
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Community Affairs review 16 Sept 2024
Referred to Committee (16/09/2024): Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (04/11/2024)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesSecond reading debate 08 Oct 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Sent to Federation Chamber for debate 08 Oct 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Referred to Federation Chamber
Second reading debate 09 Oct 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 10 Oct 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 06 Nov 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 07 Nov 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Returned to House for further consideration 07 Nov 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House second reading agreed 07 Nov 2024
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
House agreed to amendment packages 07 Nov 2024
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
House third reading agreed 07 Nov 2024
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber. Later message exchanges with the other chamber were still recorded afterwards.
Third reading agreed to
Introduced 18 Nov 2024
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading opened 18 Nov 2024
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Second reading debate 19 Nov 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 20 Nov 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 21 Nov 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate second reading agreed 21 Nov 2024
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
Senate agreed to amendment packages 21 Nov 2024
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Committee of the Whole debate
Senate third reading agreed Aye 27 No 6 21 Nov 2024
Recorded vote: 27 to 6.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Message from Senate reported 25 Nov 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House agreed to Senate amendments 25 Nov 2024
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Consideration of Senate message
Passed both houses 25 Nov 2024
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
Assent 02 Dec 2024
The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
The strongest criticism was that the bill could shift more aged-care costs onto older people, especially self-funded retirees and some part pensioners, while leaving key pricing and transition details unclear. That case was pushed most clearly by Coalition speakers, while some crossbenchers and conditional supporters focused more narrowly on gaps in safeguards, enforceable rights and how the scheme would work in practice.
Most criticism targeted costs, drafting and safeguards rather than the goal of aged-care reform itself.
Too much left to later rules and unclear transition arrangements
Opponents said too much of the real detail was being deferred to regulations and that grandfathering arrangements were unclear, creating uncertainty for older people trying to plan or apply for care.
Rights and access safeguards may still be too weak
Some conditional supporters said the bill still fell short on enforceable rights and practical protections, including support for older people with disability and better access for culturally and linguistically diverse communities.
Regional services and provider viability could be strained
Speakers warned the framework did not do enough for regional aged care and could add pressure to providers already facing high operating costs, risking service sustainability outside major cities.
Further sources
Votes
Recorded votes
How the bill itself passed
The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
Passed House passed the bill
House agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed
House passed the bill
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Carried Senate passed the bill
Passed 27 to 6. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Australia's Voice, Nationals, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens.
Carried
Senate passed the bill
Party Aye / No
Labor 16 / 0
Greens 0 / 6
Liberal Party 3 / 0
Unknown 3 / 0
Independent 2 / 0
Australia's Voice 1 / 0
Nationals 1 / 0
One Nation 1 / 0
Amendments at a glance
Amendments grouped by chamber. Where APH reports aggregate counts, the package card summarizes the matching public amendment sheets by source theme.
House
Carried Remove worker voice body
Passed 51 to 8. Support came from Labor, Centre Alliance, and Nationals. Opposition came from Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carried
Remove worker voice body
This amended the bill before its final House passage and removed a proposed worker representation mechanism from the aged care framework.
Party Aye / No
Labor 36 / 0
Unknown 7 / 5
Independent 6 / 2
Greens 0 / 1
Centre Alliance 1 / 0
Nationals 1 / 0
Carried Add international civil rights covenant
This bill amendment would add the International Covenant on Civil and Political RightsA human rights treaty mentioned in amendments and the explanatory material as one of the standards the bill is meant to align with. to the objects and define the covenant in the bill.
Carried
Add international civil rights covenant
This bill amendment would add the International Covenant on Civil and Political RightsA human rights treaty mentioned in amendments and the explanatory material as one of the standards the bill is meant to align with. to the objects and define the covenant in the bill.
Passed on the voices
The chamber agreed to this amendment without a counted vote — the presiding officer judged the ayes louder than the noes, and no member called for a division.
Carried Earlier review of refundable deposits
This amendment would bring forward the review timing for refundable deposits and require the review report to be tabled sooner, with a broader review of the Act.
Carried
Earlier review of refundable deposits
This amendment would bring forward the review timing for refundable deposits and require the review report to be tabled sooner, with a broader review of the Act.
Passed on the voices
The chamber agreed to this amendment without a counted vote — the presiding officer judged the ayes louder than the noes, and no member called for a division.
Carried House accepted all Senate amendments
The House agreed to the amendments made by the Senate, so the bill could pass both chambers in the same form.
Carried
House accepted all Senate amendments
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Carried Government package: 66 amendments
Government amendments tighten the transition framework by deleting advisory bodies provisions and adding no worse off rules, including a clause that compensation under section 186 is not treated as compensation or damages under other laws.
Carried
Government package: 66 amendments
Passed on the voices
The chamber agreed to this amendment package without a counted vote. APH records the agreed count by amendment, while the source documents are grouped into amendment sheets.
Senate
Defeated Call for stronger rollout changes
Defeated 30 to 31. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, UAP, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and Australia's Voice. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeated
Call for stronger rollout changes
This was a second-reading statement vote, so it did not change the bill text but tested support for criticism of the reform rollout and implementation detail.
Party Aye / No
Labor 0 / 19
Liberal Party 14 / 0
Greens 0 / 9
Unknown 6 / 2
Nationals 5 / 0
Independent 2 / 0
One Nation 2 / 0
Australia's Voice 0 / 1
UAP 1 / 0
Defeated Call to keep under-65s out
Defeated 12 to 32. Support came from Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and minor parties and independents.
Defeated
Call to keep under-65s out
This was a position statement on the second reading motion, not a direct change to the bill text, and it would have pressed the government to stop younger disabled people entering residential aged care.
Party Aye / No
Labor 0 / 19
Greens 9 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 4
Unknown 0 / 4
Independent 2 / 0
Nationals 0 / 2
One Nation 0 / 2
Australia's Voice 1 / 0
UAP 0 / 1
Carried Accept aged care funding changes
Passed 29 to 11. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Australia's Voice, Nationals, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carried
Accept aged care funding changes
This kept the bill’s major funding model changes in the legislation and allowed the committee stage to move on to later amendments and final passage.
Party Aye / No
Labor 18 / 0
Greens 0 / 10
Unknown 5 / 0
Independent 1 / 1
Liberal Party 2 / 0
Australia's Voice 1 / 0
Nationals 1 / 0
UAP 1 / 0
Defeated Strengthen whistleblower protections
Defeated 13 to 26. Support came from Greens and Australia's Voice. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeated
Strengthen whistleblower protections
This vote concerned whether to expand the bill’s whistleblower framework beyond the government’s version, including stronger anti-reprisal protections.
Party Aye / No
Labor 0 / 18
Greens 10 / 0
Unknown 1 / 4
Independent 1 / 1
Australia's Voice 1 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 1
Nationals 0 / 1
UAP 0 / 1
Carried Require complaint determinations
Passed 43 to 16. Support came from Liberal Party, Greens, Nationals, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carried
Require complaint determinations
This would have imposed a more prescriptive complaints-handling process on the aged care complaints system and required a written outcome for complainants.
Party Aye / No
Liberal Party 18 / 0
Labor 0 / 15
Greens 10 / 0
Unknown 7 / 1
Nationals 3 / 0
Independent 2 / 0
Australia's Voice 1 / 0
One Nation 1 / 0
UAP 1 / 0
Carried Guarantee access to chosen person
Passed 40 to 17. Support came from Liberal Party, Greens, Nationals, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carried
Guarantee access to chosen person
This added a rights-style access safeguard around personal contact and visitation in the aged care setting.
Party Aye / No
Labor 0 / 16
Liberal Party 15 / 0
Greens 9 / 0
Unknown 7 / 1
Nationals 4 / 0
Independent 2 / 0
Australia's Voice 1 / 0
One Nation 1 / 0
UAP 1 / 0
Defeated Strengthen whistleblower protections
Moved by Larissa Waters (Greens). Defeated 13 to 26. Support came from Greens and Australia's Voice. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeated
Strengthen whistleblower protections
This was the journal record of the same whistleblower-protection package considered in committee, showing the chamber rejected the broader Greens changes.
Party Aye / No
Labor 0 / 18
Greens 10 / 0
Unknown 1 / 4
Independent 1 / 1
Australia's Voice 1 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 1
Nationals 0 / 1
UAP 0 / 1
Carried Senate passed the bill
Moved by Anne Ruston (Liberal Party). Passed 27 to 6. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Australia's Voice, Nationals, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens.
Carried
Senate passed the bill
This was the final Senate passage vote, sending the bill on to the House with the Senate’s amendments for further consideration.
Party Aye / No
Labor 16 / 0
Greens 0 / 6
Liberal Party 3 / 0
Unknown 3 / 0
Independent 2 / 0
Australia's Voice 1 / 0
Nationals 1 / 0
One Nation 1 / 0
Carried Government and opposition aged-care amendments adopted
The Senate agreed on voices to 90 Government amendments and five Opposition amendments to the aged-care bill.
Carried
Government and opposition aged-care amendments adopted
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Defeated Add support for older disabled people
The Senate rejected this on voices. Senator Pocock’s proposal would have added an object requiring people over 65 with disability to receive daily living supports and outcomes comparable to younger NDIS participants.
Defeated
Add support for older disabled people
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Carried Cap deposit retention at two percent
The Senate agreed to this on voices. Senator Pocock’s proposal would stop providers deducting retention amounts from a refundable depositMoney paid by a resident that is meant to be returned later, minus any allowed deductions. once yearly deductions reach 2 per cent of the deposit.
Carried
Cap deposit retention at two percent
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Defeated Remove higher everyday living limit
The Senate rejected this on voices. Senator Ruston’s proposal would have removed the subclause dealing with higher everyday living agreements.
Defeated
Remove higher everyday living limit
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Defeated Make transitional rules for rollout
The Senate rejected this on voices. Senator Ruston’s proposal would have required transitional rules for the new home support system, including how older services are carried over and how contributions are set during the changeover.
Defeated
Make transitional rules for rollout
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Carried Set registration conditions by rule
The Senate agreed to this on voices. Senator Ruston’s proposal would prevent the Commissioner from imposing registration conditions unless they are prescribed by the rules, apart from conditions already dealt with elsewhere.
Carried
Set registration conditions by rule
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Defeated Expand eligibility for under 65s
The Senate rejected this on voices. Senator Ruston’s proposal would have allowed people under 65 to access aged care where their needs could be met most effectively by a funded aged care service.
Defeated
Expand eligibility for under 65s
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Defeated Limit protected disclosure recipients
The Senate rejected this on voices. Senator Ruston’s proposal would have limited protected disclosures to a registered provider or to an aged care worker who had agreed in writing to receive them.
Defeated
Limit protected disclosure recipients
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Defeated Senate amendment defeated
The Senate Journal records this outcome as defeated on voices.
Defeated
Senate amendment defeated
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Carried Main government aged-care amendments adopted
The Senate agreed on voices to the main block of Government amendments, excluding separately handled amendments in the same package.
Carried
Main government aged-care amendments adopted
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Carried Complaints CommissionerThe official responsible for handling aged care complaints and, in some amendments, issuing formal complaint determinations. subdelegation adopted
The Senate agreed on voices to Government amendment 88, adding safeguards for the Complaints CommissionerThe official responsible for handling aged care complaints and, in some amendments, issuing formal complaint determinations. to subdelegate functions or powers to specified non-SES staff or qualified consultants.
Carried
Complaints CommissionerThe official responsible for handling aged care complaints and, in some amendments, issuing formal complaint determinations. subdelegation adopted
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Defeated Senate amendment defeated
The Senate Journal records this outcome as defeated on voices.
Defeated
Senate amendment defeated
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Carried Review key aged care rules quickly
The Senate agreed to this on voices. Senator Ruston’s proposal would require the Senate committee to review major aged care rules within three months of tabling and report back promptly.
Carried
Review key aged care rules quickly
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Defeated Make serious duty breaches offences
The Senate rejected this on voices. Senator Allman-Payne’s proposal would have turned serious breaches of provider duties into offence provisions, including stronger penalties where death or serious injury results.
Defeated
Make serious duty breaches offences
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Carried Quarterly waiting time reports
The Senate agreed to Pocock David's proposal on voices, covering amendment will only be moved if amendments (1), (2) and (3) on sheet 3097 are agreed to and this bill amendment would require the System GovernorThe official or body that oversees parts of the aged care system, including reporting, approvals and regulatory functions. to report quarterly on waiting periods for certain funded aged care services and publish the report online.
Carried
Quarterly waiting time reports
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Defeated Add support for older disabled people
The Senate rejected Pocock David's proposal on voices, covering this bill amendment would add an object requiring support for people over 65 with disability comparable to NDIS outcomes for younger people.
Defeated
Add support for older disabled people
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Carried Cap deposit retention at two percent
The Senate agreed to Pocock David's proposal on voices, covering this bill amendment would stop providers from deducting retention amounts from a refundable depositMoney paid by a resident that is meant to be returned later, minus any allowed deductions. balance if deductions in a year reach 2% of the deposit.
Carried
Cap deposit retention at two percent
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Defeated Make transitional rules for rollout
The Senate rejected Ruston Anne's proposal on voices, covering this bill amendment would require transitional rules for the new home support system, including review by a Senate committee.
Defeated
Make transitional rules for rollout
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Defeated Limit protected disclosure recipients
The Senate rejected Ruston Anne's proposal on voices, covering this bill amendment would limit protected disclosures to a registered provider or an aged care worker who has agreed in writing to receive them.
Defeated
Limit protected disclosure recipients
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Carried Set registration conditions by rule
The Senate agreed to Ruston Anne's proposal on voices, covering this bill amendment would stop the Commissioner imposing registration conditions unless the conditions are prescribed by the rules, except for conditions already covered elsewhere.
Carried
Set registration conditions by rule
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Carried Ruston follow-up amendment adopted
The Senate Journal records a Ruston amendment as agreed on voices.
Carried
Ruston follow-up amendment adopted
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
This list includes amendment votes, procedural votes and votes on the bill itself.
The parliamentary record also shows 90 Government, 5 Opposition amendments agreed without a counted division.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
Sponsor speech Supports
Anika Wells
Wells strongly supports the bill, saying it replaces the old aged care law with a rights-based act that puts older people at the centre of the system.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead opposing voice Opposes
Larissa Waters
Waters criticises the bill and says the Greens are concerned it would create a two-tier aged-care system, raise co-contributions and accommodation costs, and leave rights largely unenforceable.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead supporting voice Supports
Anne Ruston
Ruston says the opposition will support the aged care bill because it delivers a rights-based framework with choice and control for older Australians, but she argues it still needs substantial amendments because the government has not been transparent enough and the bill remains inadequate in key areas.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead non-major voice Supports
Allegra Spender
Spender supports the bill and says it is a significant step forward for reforming aged care, especially because it introduces a rights-based framework, stronger funding settings and more emphasis on home care.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Labor
19 speakers · 19 support
Labor
19 speakers · 19 support
-
Malarndirri McCarthy Malarndirri McCarthy strongly supports the bill and says it is the long-needed rights-based replacement for the old aged care law.
“The new rights-based Aged Care Bill, we are introducing, puts older people, and the services they need, front and centre.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anika Wells ★ Wells strongly supports the bill, saying it replaces the old aged care law with a rights-based act that puts older people at the centre of the system.
“The new rights-based Aged Care Bill we are introducing puts older people, and the services they need, front and centre.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Alison Byrnes Byrnes supports the bill and says it is a once-in-a-generation reform that will make aged care fairer, more transparent and better aligned to older Australians' needs.
“These measures are already making a difference, but there is still much work to be done to address the ongoing aged-care shortage in our region, and this bill is set to do that for the long term. The introduction of the Aged Care Bill 2024 marks a landmark, once-in-a-generation reform that will shape the way we support people to live independently and with dignity as they age.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tony Sheldon Tony Sheldon strongly supports the Aged Care Bill 2024 and says it is needed to fix the failures exposed by the royal commission and COVID-era deaths in aged care.
“I strongly support this bill and congratulate the minister, Anika Wells, on the incredible amount of work that has been done in this portfolio over this term. The minister has said that the legislation 'will allow us all to take the next steps with confidence and to venture into a new age of excellence' and that 'there is more to do with aged care and our mission continues.' I support the ambition for future tranches of reform in aged care. I would like to see a strengthening of the transparency requirements that are placed on digital platform operators, particularly in the home-care sector. More work should be done to hold digital platforms to the same standard as registered providers, including requirements to demonstrate to the commission that they are compliant with the strengthened Aged Care Quality Standards and Code of Conduct for Aged Care; to be subject to regular ongoing audits or compliance monitoring by the commission; and to comply with the Serious Incident Response Scheme and report directly to the commission in line with requirements under the scheme.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Shayne Neumann Shayne Neumann strongly supports the bill, saying it delivers the most significant aged care reform in decades by putting older people’s rights, safety and dignity first.
“The legislation before the chamber is going to deliver a rights based aged care system; a new program that supports older people to live independently on their own, in their own homes, as long as possible; a new regulatory framework and a stronger regulator; new quality standards; and fair co-contributions to make the Australian aged-care system sustainable into the future.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Helen Polley Polley supports the Aged Care Bill 2024 and says it is a necessary reform that restores dignity, strengthens rights and standards, and makes aged care more sustainable.
“This is good legislation. I have been in this place for a long time. There is no such thing as a perfect piece of legislation. That is why we have been negotiating with those opposite for over 12 months. For 12 months, we've been trying to get them to the table, to actually vote and to support this legislation, but we never walked away from it. We were never going to go away from our belief that this was really important.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Susan Templeman Templeman supports the bill and says it is the next step in carrying out the aged care royal commission reforms.
“I'm very confident that the changes that we're bringing in will lead to a different way of thinking about aged care and about being supported at home. The changes will mean Australians have respect and dignity as they age. They get to stay in their home for longer—as long as they can be supported there, and we hope that that will be longer. I hope it also means that families will feel less of a challenge in supporting their older relatives, and I really commend this bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Daniel Mulino Mulino supports the bill and says it is a once-in-a-generation reform that strengthens aged care rights, quality and funding.
“I'm very pleased to speak to this bill. It's a really important bill. It's a once-in-a-generation change in response to a whole series of recommendations made by the royal commission to what I believe is one of the key planks of our safety net. Australia has one of the great safety nets in the world, and those aspects of our safety net which protect the interests of our older people are, for me, some of the most important parts of that safety net. I commend this bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Murray Watt Watt supports the bill and urges the Senate to pass it because he says it gives aged care a new rights-based foundation that puts older people first, strengthens regulation, and makes the system more sustainable.
“We cannot realise this potential if senators do not come together and pass this bill, so I urge the Senate to support this bill to deliver the long-term, sustainable and high-quality care that older Australians deserve.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tracey Roberts Tracey Roberts supports the bill as a major aged care reform, saying it will give older Australians more control, better home care, and stronger protections while keeping the system financially sustainable.
“This reform is a once-in-a-generation change. It reflects the values that we hold dear: fairness, compassion and responsibility. As Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said, these are reforms we are proud to deliver, as we promised we would.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Joanne Ryan Ryan says she supports the Aged Care Bill 2024 because it implements royal commission reforms, strengthens rights and regulation, and improves home care and assessment so older Australians can live with dignity.
“I'm pleased to rise in support of the Aged Care Bill 2024, which is in response to the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety findings. The bill delivers on our election commitment to fix aged care. The royal commission passed down 148 recommendations for aged-care reforms: 136 have been addressed since the tabling of the report in 2021; 94 have been addressed by the Albanese Labor government since coming to office. This bill responds directly to recommendations from the royal commission into aged care and will address 58 recommendations in total. The bill will build on the aged-care reforms already put in place by the Albanese government. This includes $11.3 billion committed for aged-care workers to receive a 15 per cent pay rise. This is to make our aged-care workers feel valued by our community and to demonstrate their value, to demonstrate that, as Australians, we appreciate the value of the work that they do. And it ensures that the community understands the importance of the work they do.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Libby Coker Coker strongly supports the bill, saying it puts older Australians at the centre of aged care, strengthens rights and enforcement, and backs the wider Labor reforms needed to improve care, staffing and funding.
“This is incredible progress, but we know that there's more to do, and that's what this bill is all about. This reform will put the rights of older people first. Thank you to all the older Australians; to carers, including Donna, who I met all those years ago; to union providers; to advocates; and to other experts who helped us get this incredibly important milestone to this point. I hope that it will now be passed and that it will become a reality. Thank you.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Graham Perrett Graham Perrett strongly supports the bill, saying it will help deliver a rights based aged care system and smooth the transition to the new framework.
“Thus I'm here today to speak in support of the Aged Care (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024, and I commend the minister for the important work that she is doing. This bill will support the operation of the Aged Care Bill 2024, which will commence from 1 July next year and deliver a rights based aged-care system. This legislation is a once-in-a-generation reform that will shape the way we support people to live independently and with dignity as they age.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Carina Garland Garland supports the bill and says it is a landmark reform that will replace the old aged care laws with a rights-based system, stronger regulation, and fairer funding so older people can live with dignity.
“The Aged Care Bill 2024 will replace the Aged Care Act and the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission Act. This is a landmark, once-in-a-generation reform that will shape the way we support people to live independently and with dignity as they age.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Marielle Smith Marielle Smith supports the bill and says the Senate should pass it urgently because it responds to the royal commission's findings and delivers long-needed aged care reform.
“The aged-care sector absolutely needs reforms. These reforms are once in a generation, and I commend the minister who has worked tirelessly, since she was sworn into this portfolio, on seeking to deliver a reform program which responds to that report and responds to the title Neglecta report that this chamber should never be able to ignore—and a response of the complexity, detail and, at times, compromise necessary to change this system to ensure that it works for older Australians, that older people get the care, dignity and respect they deserve, that we do that in a sustainable way and that we don't shirk our responsibilities in this parliament to respond to that No. 1 recommendation to deliver reform and to deliver a new act this term. That's our opportunity today. I commend the bill to the Senate.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Catryna Bilyk Bilyk strongly supports the Aged Care Bill 2024 and says it is landmark reform that will improve rights, regulation, home care and fairer contributions for older Australians.
“I commend this bill to the Senate.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tania Lawrence Lawrence supports the bill and says it is a big step forward because it puts older people’s rights, dignity and equitable access at the centre of aged care.
“The Aged Care Bill 2024 is a big step forward for the people we love, for the people we know and respect, for ourselves—all of us, the people we will become—and for Australia's children and, of course, their children. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anne Stanley Stanley says Labor will support the bill as a landmark reform that rebuilds aged care, strengthens rights and regulation, and makes the system more sustainable after years of neglect.
“After nearly a decade of neglect, funding cuts and general dysfunction under the former government, our government through this bill continues the reconstruction of aged care in Australia. These reforms, as I and many others have mentioned, are a landmark, a once-in-a-generation reform that will improve the quality of aged-care services provided to older Australians. It builds on the work that has already been done by the Albanese Labor government in increasing the wages of aged-care workers and implementing the requirement for aged-care facilities to have a registered nurse on site. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Jess Walsh Jess Walsh supports the bill and says it will deliver historic aged-care reform that gives older Australians more choice, dignity and support at homeThe home care program in this bill that helps older people pay for equipment, home changes, recovery care and end-of-life care at home..
“I, too, rise to speak in support of the Aged Care Bill 2024, which will deliver historic reforms to our aged-care systems—historic reforms that only a Labor government would deliver in office.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Coalition
29 speakers · 34 contributions · 18 support · 3 oppose · 8 mixed
Coalition
29 speakers · 34 contributions · 18 support · 3 oppose · 8 mixed
-
Anne Ruston ★ Ruston says the opposition will support the aged care bill because it delivers a rights-based framework with choice and control for older Australians, but she argues it still needs substantial amendments because the government has not been transparent enough and the bill remains inadequate in key areas.
“So, as I said, we need to make sure that we do get this bill right and we need to do it right once. We cannot afford to have all of the errors that sit in this bill get passed in this place. So the opposition—and, I am sure, the Greens—will be moving a series of amendments during the committee stage to try and make this inadequate bill better. Fundamentally, we believe in a rights based framework for the delivery of Australian aged care, because we believe that having choice and control delivers the dignity back to older Australians, and that is the most fundamental reason that this bill is in this place. But, because this government can't be trusted to provide the kind of transparency and detail we need, we will continue to prosecute that case.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Maria Kovacic Kovacic says the coalition will support the aged care bill, because it embeds a rights based framework and is needed for reform.
“The coalition has agreed to the passage of these bills because it is necessary to embed a rights based framework and to ensure a world-class aged-care system in our country. However, the coalition remains deeply concerned about the lack of appropriate transparency, particularly the absence of critical rules and implementation guidelines.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Barnaby Joyce 2 contributions Joyce says the coalition will support the bill, but wants amendments to improve it and avoid regulations that could force regional aged-care homes to close.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Barnaby Joyce on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Joyce says the coalition will support the bill, but wants amendments to improve it and avoid regulations that could force regional aged-care homes to close. He backs the bill because he thinks it strengthens oversight and dignity for vulnerable older people, especially in communities with few alternatives.
“Later on, I did a lot of work—I'm not trying to blow wind up my own backside—for St Vincent de Paul, and a big part of that was to go to aged-care facilities. What people wanted to do was have that connection to their lives. They didn't want to be isolated. I used to make an excuse to see them by selling them the newspaper and if they didn't have the money I just gave it to them. They just wanted to talk about what the season was like, what the cattle prices were like—they wanted to talk about their life. It's called humanity, and this bill, which the coalition will be supporting, although we'll be putting up amendments to it, builds on allowing people's humanity.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Joyce supports the aged care bill, saying regional and community-run facilities need to be kept open and given more flexible rules so older people in small towns can still access care. He argues the bill should be adjusted to avoid imposing costs like the Denman carbon offset burden on facilities that are trying to expand.
“In closing, can we please have a close look at and nuance the regional facilities—especially the community based ones—and can you, Minister, please ring up the Denman community aged-care facility and say, 'We want to talk to you about how we scrub this $3.51 million that you've got to pay for a carbon offset.'”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Sam Birrell Birrell says he supports the aged care bill after negotiating changes with the government, especially protections and extra funding for regional and rural providers.
“Aged care and what we do in this place are really important for our families, and I'm really pleased with the bill we've been able to negotiate and come to an agreement on.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Rowan Ramsey Ramsey supports the Aged Care Bill 2024 and says the opposition has worked with the government to improve it, including on grandfathering and financial settings.
“Reforming the aged-care sector is necessary; it's a fair call, and it is time for reform, with the Aged Care Bill 2024. We have co-operated with the government on the royal commission recommendations, at least part of the response, and we've reached broad agreement with the government on the financial arrangements, which will be a penalty on some Australians, and it took some work to achieve some amendments, which we believe are right and proper.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tony Pasin 2 contributions Pasin says the coalition will support the bill after securing changes, especially grandfathering, lower consumer contributions, removed criminal penalties, removed workers' voice provisions, and extra funding for rural and regional aged care.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Tony Pasin on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Pasin says the coalition will support the bill after securing changes, especially grandfathering, lower consumer contributions, removed criminal penalties, removed workers' voice provisions, and extra funding for rural and regional aged care. He still criticises the government for excluding the coalition and sector from co-design and says the regional funding is helpful but probably not enough.
“I say, though, that even this provision is modest and that, in a perfect world—one perhaps governed by a coalition government—I'd hope to see additional capex in this space, because, just in relation to the last Modified Monash Model 5 to 7 grant funding round, we saw an oversubscription rate of 10 to one. Literally billions of dollars of capex are required in this sector right now. So I'm hopeful that the reforms will give the aged-care sector the ability to invest that capital, to grow and meet the demands of a baby-boomer population that will need to access aged care, but I remain a little sceptical that the $300 million—whilst I support it, and obviously it's an achievement to go from zero dollars to $300 million in this space, courtesy of our negotiations—is sufficient.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Pasin says the coalition will support the bill because it aligns with a new rights based framework for aged care, but he criticises the government for failing to provide a clear transition period and says that puts older Australians and the sector at risk.
“The coalition will support this bill in line with our commitment to the new rights based framework for our aged-care sector, but we condemn the Albanese government for putting at risk older Australians and the aged-care sector by neglecting to provide a clear transition period.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Aaron Violi Violi says the coalition will back the aged care bill after negotiating changes to protect existing residents, cap contributions and remove criminal penalties, but he argues the government still has not properly addressed workforce shortages, regulation and rollout timing.
“The bill, however, aims to ensure that the Commonwealth aged-care services remain accessible to those who require them today and into the future. It seeks to promote dignity, independence and a meaningful life for older Australians, which the coalition and I remain committed to.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Hollie Hughes Hollie Hughes says the coalition will support the aged care reforms, but only after pushing amendments to fix consultation, implementation and fairness problems in the bill.
“We will move a number of amendments to this legislation to make sure that it is workable, that it won't adversely impact older Australians and that it will not have unintended consequences. But it is the government that must ultimately wear the pain of any shortcomings or failures of this legislation. The coalition believes that reform is necessary and we do not wish to be obstructionist for the sake of it but we will also not simply roll over and give this government carte blanche to do as it pleases, especially on significant legislation that it is once again failing to develop in an honest, meaningful and open way.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Linda Reynolds Reynolds says the coalition will support the bill after securing major amendments, because they want a rights-based aged care system with safeguards for older Australians and providers.
“Time doesn't permit for me to go through all of the other reforms that the coalition has fought for and achieved. But while there have been significant achievements during these negotiations, it is important to remember that this is Labor's package of reforms which we have worked very hard to get to a point where we can support what started off as incredibly poor legislation.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Michael McCormack 3 contributions McCormack says the coalition will not seek to delay the bill and will let it pass, but wants the reforms closely scrutinised so they are implemented well.
Hansard records 3 separate contributions by Michael McCormack on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
McCormack says the coalition will not simply back the Aged Care Bill 2024 as drafted and wants it sent to committee because it is only an improvement and still needs substantial work. His main concerns are the bill's length, the state of the aged-care system, and the lack of adequate support for rural and regional providers.
“Last sitting week, the Albanese Labor government introduced its new Aged Care Bill 2024 to the parliament. We, as the coalition opposition, think that the bill ought to go to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry. As you can see, there are a lot of pages to it. There is a lot of work that needs to be done. It is an improvement, but there is still a long, long way to go.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
McCormack says aged care is a serious crisis for regional communities, where staffing shortages and funding rules are forcing older people out of town and away from their families. He uses the bill speech to press for urgent fixes, but he does not clearly state whether he supports or opposes the bill itself.
“I have here the Aged Care Bill 2024. It is quite a tome. But in this volume you can't get the feeling and the emotion and the hurt and the angst and the despair and the anxiety of regional people, for whom aged care is so important. I understand it is important for everybody, but it is particularly so in regional communities, where, lately, all too many older Australians who've given so much for this country have had to be shipped out to far-flung towns to get care in their twilight years, and this is simply not good enough. This document won't expound just how bad that is for the families of those loved ones who are forced into not being able to get ageing in place.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
McCormack says the coalition will not seek to delay the bill and will let it pass, but wants the reforms closely scrutinised so they are implemented well. He argues that aged-care providers, especially in regional Australia, are under severe pressure and need better support.
“We won't seek to delay the passage of this bill, Australians deserve better than broken promises and more procrastination and delay by this Albanese Labor government—I understand that—but these changes have to be scrutinised to ensure the process of reform can be implemented in the best way possible, because, at the end of the day, our society is ageing, and we need to provide the very best quality of care.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Melissa Price Melissa Price says the coalition will support the aged care bill, because it is a necessary reform and the government accepted a number of coalition changes to improve it.
“This bill goes some way to improving the aged-care system, which in its current form is not sustainable. But it's a good start—let's be positive. It's a good start, but we should be watching the aged-care sector like a hawk to ensure that the cost of care is reasonable, that care is of a high standard, and that the aged-care providers are financially viable and believe they have a bright future.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Mark Coulton Coulton gives the bill conditional support, saying he backs the concept and sees it as a step in the right direction, but reserves his final judgment until he sees the bill in its final form.
“We don't talk about this enough. We talk about health care, about education, about child care, but the ability to die in your own town, surrounded by your family and friends, is a basic human need. We can't shuffle people around like a commodity. Hopefully—I've got great faith in this legislation—those things will be addressed. I give support to the concept. I'll make my judgement when I see the final bill, but I think this is a step in the right direction.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Jenny Ware Ware says the coalition broadly supports the aged care reforms and wants a better system for older Australians, but argues the bill could have done more on workforce shortages and clearer funding and care arrangements.
“To conclude, broadly these reforms are supported, but this could have been done better and we must ensure that aged-care reform is done well for our country going forward.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anne Webster Webster says the opposition does not accept the bill as drafted and is particularly concerned that its grandfathering rules amount to legislation by press release and create unfair uncertainty for older people applying for care.
“This brings me to the question of grandfathering arrangements proposed under this bill. The government has signalled that those in the system at the time of the government's announcement of this bill will benefit from existing arrangements and will not have to pay more their for care. Firstly, that is effectively legislation by press release, and that is problematic. Secondly, what if someone applies for an aged-care place before 1 July 2025, or whatever the start date is settled at through this legislative process, and has or has not received a place? Are they both grandfathered? What if someone applies on 30 June 2025?”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Gavin Pearce Pearce says the coalition supports the aged care bill and worked with the government to improve it, especially by securing grandfathering for existing residents and removing criminal penalties.
“For its part, the coalition has worked tirelessly for six months with the government, in good faith, in order to progress the bill. But, to be clear, this bill represents Labor's reform package, and this has not been a co-design process. We have fought hard to make amendments where we believed that changes were necessary, and we have achieved significant changes throughout this process—changes that will ensure that the dignity of older Australians is at the front and centre of our policymaking agenda, and changes that will ensure that no Australian is penalised because of their geographical location, cultural background or financial position.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Colin Boyce Boyce says the coalition supports the aged care bill because it creates a rights-based framework for older Australians, but argues it needed major changes and still has shortcomings that must be fixed.
“Following the inquiry, the coalition remains supportive of introducing a rights based framework to guarantee a world-class aged-care system for older Australians into the future. However, as coalition senators noted in the report, there are concerns that the bill contains several shortcomings that should be remedied for it to deliver on its promised outcomes.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Dan Tehan Tehan says the coalition has improved the Aged Care Bill by securing regional funding, grandfathering, and the removal of criminal penalties and the worker voice, but says its final position still depends on the Senate inquiry.
“Obviously we've still got a long way to go because there is that inquiry and the feedback that comes from that inquiry. We'll be making sure that we interrogate this legislation fully. The recommendations that come back from the inquiry are going to be really important in making the final decision on our side as to whether we ultimately can support this legislation or not. Changes like securing that extra $300 million, taking out the worker voice, making sure that those working Australians who have worked hard all their lives can have certainty around what they're going to be paying when it comes to aged care, and more, have made this bill better. But we'll wait and see what comes out of the inquiry to decide our final position on the bill.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Cameron Caldwell Cameron Caldwell says the coalition is working constructively with the government on the aged care bill, but will reserve its final position until the committee inquiry reports.
“This bill represents a significant package of reforms, which is why we have pushed for this bill to immediately be referred to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee for an inquiry. We look forward to continuing to have an open dialogue with older Australians and the aged-care sector, the stakeholders, about the government's proposed reforms through this open and transparent Senate inquiry process. We will, of course, reserve our final position on this legislation until that committee delivers its final report.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Wendy Askew Askew says the coalition will support the bill, but argues it still needs further amendments because it is Labor's package and does not adequately address workforce, regulatory impacts or implementation timelines.
“While the coalition will ultimately support this bill, it is important to remember: this is Labor's package of reforms. It was not co-designed with the coalition. As mentioned in response to the advocacy of witnesses to the inquiry, further amendments will be proposed by the coalition. These proposed amendments will address concerns raised and will look to ensure the bill is fit for purpose, provides dignity, respect and security to our older Australians and does not penalise hardworking people in the sector who are just doing their jobs.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Angie Bell Bell says the coalition will back the bill because it is a better aged care package after negotiation, especially on grandfathering, lower costs for older Australians and support for regional providers.
“This is an important area that needs reform, and the coalition has been working closely to try to improve the Aged Care Bill 2024. But, with more than half of aged-care homes across the country currently operating at a loss, an ageing population and a growing desire to age at home, there is definitely a need for that sector reform that I talked about. We need a system that provides dignity and clarity for older Australians. This legislation delivers on the first recommendation of the royal commission appointed by the coalition to implement a new rights based aged-care act. In response to the royal commission, I'll note that the former coalition government provided more than $18 billion in funding to support the immediate needs of the sector. I recall Minister Hunt, who was the minister at the time, and the fantastic job he did with his four key pillars for the aged-care sector reform and the funding that went along with that. I congratulate him on the previous work that he has done. I also congratulate Senator Ruston, who has done so much work on this particular bill that's before the House, working with the government to make it a much better bill. While it's not perfect, it's much better than it was.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Michelle Landry Landry says the coalition supports the aged care bill in principle, but will not take a final position until the committee report is delivered.
“While we support the spirit of this bill, we reserve our final position until the committee's report is delivered. I'm proud to say that, through negotiations, the coalition has achieved significant amendments to the government's proposed legislation that will safeguard the interests of older Australians.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Pat Conaghan Conaghan says the National Party supports the bill and is pleased it passed through bipartisan cooperation, especially after coalition amendments on grandfathering, contribution caps, regional funding and removing criminal penalties were accepted.
“At the end of the day, it is pleasing to see that all sides of government have worked well to see this bill pass. I commend it to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Keith Pitt Pitt says the coalition will not back the bill because it will make many older Australians, especially part pensioners and self-funded retirees, pay more for aged care.
“We should be upfront about this. This legislation will take more money from part pensioners and self-funded retirees in order to fund aged care because of the policies of the government. That is the reality. The government has had the gall to book a budget saving on top of it. I think, whilst it's absolutely essential that we have aged care facilities that are suitable, they still need to be based on need, not broad-blanket policies across the board for which there may be absolutely no requirement, depending on the model that's used by the home.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Rick Wilson Wilson says the coalition welcomes the aged care bill and has secured changes to improve it, but it is reserving its final position until the committee inquiry reports.
“As the committee continues its inquiry into the provisions of this bill, the coalition will continue to reserve our final position until the committee delivers its final report.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
David Gillespie Gillespie says the Nationals will support the bill, but he argues it still leaves too much detail to later regulations and will force self-funded retirees to carry more of the cost.
“This is an important bill. We will be supporting it. We think the contribution caps need much more detail, but it appears that self-funded retirees will be bankrolling a lot of the extra income, rather than facilities getting more from the federal government.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Garth Hamilton Hamilton says the opposition will work with the government to improve aged care and supports the bill's goals, but he wants the minister to listen to his constituent's case and use it to shape better laws and regulations.
“I would ask humbly for the minister to reconsider her decision not to meet with Kim. When we look at the intent of this bill, what it is hoping to achieve, its objectives, which are important, which we all agree on, how we get there is an important discussion of politics, and that is the debate we must have. But we all agree in our hearts that things must improve; they must get better. And surely a case like John's Curry's must be heard at the highest level to ensure that whatever we can find from that, that whatever changes we can make legislatively or within regulation are made.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Melissa McIntosh Melissa McIntosh says the coalition supports the aged care reform framework in the bill, especially the no worse off principle and the removal of restrictive caps, but argues Labor has handled the rollout badly and needs further scrutiny and consultation.
“This bill provides for the essential framework to ensure that the 'no worse off' principle can be implemented.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Richard Colbeck 2 contributions Colbeck opposes the bill, arguing it was brought on too late and that its home-care and accommodation settings are unfair, especially for people on lower incomes.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Richard Colbeck on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Colbeck opposes the bill, arguing it was brought on too late and that its home-care and accommodation settings are unfair, especially for people on lower incomes. He says the government has delayed reforms, left waiting times unacceptable, and designed the scheme to push people out of home care.
“Of course, the new design of the home-care system will drive people out of home care and out of their homes. They might just need that little bit of home care around the house or around the garden. Senator Pocock talked about it, and so did the Greens in their contribution. They might just need that little bit of assistance with some of those daily chores to stay in their own homes. But, with the way that the funding system has been designed under the government's new model, you might as well pay on the cash market than try and go through a home-care package because you will pay more. And, if you're in the upper echelon of wage earners, you could pay double what you're paying on the private market. The design of the scheme is designed to push people out of home care. The waiting times for home care are, quite simply, unacceptable.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Colbeck opposes the bill, arguing the government is two years late, has withheld key regulations, and has designed the reforms so people on low incomes will pay more and wait longer for home care. He says the system is not good governance and criticises Labor for misrepresenting the royal commission and failing to put the care back into aged care.
“The reality is that what we have seen from the government in getting us to where we are now—is it good governance? Clearly, it's not.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Keith Wolahan Wolahan supports the Aged Care Bill 2024 and describes it as a constructive reform achieved through parliament working together.
“This bill, the Aged Care Bill 2024, has both. This is an example of the parties of government working with each other on a critical part not just of our economy but of our society. It is about who we are. We know all Australians deserve an aged-care system that is sustainable into the future but also provides for a dignified retirement for Australians who deserve no less.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Greens
3 speakers · 5 contributions · 3 oppose
Greens
3 speakers · 5 contributions · 3 oppose
-
Larissa Waters ★ Waters criticises the bill and says the Greens are concerned it would create a two-tier aged-care system, raise co-contributions and accommodation costs, and leave rights largely unenforceable.
“Our concern is that these bills risk creating a two-tiered system that bakes in inequality. The Greens share the concerns of older Australians that these bills will increase their co-contributions and accommodation costs but don't guarantee enforceable rights or the quality of care for participants.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Jordon Steele-John 3 contributions Jordon Steele-John opposes the bill, saying it leaves aged care rights unenforceable, fails to stop younger disabled people being placed in residential aged care, and bakes in weak guardianship rules.
Hansard records 3 separate contributions by Jordon Steele-John, including an amendment-moving contribution. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Steele-John opposes the bill because he says it does not deliver universal access to aged care and instead risks expanding a user-pays model that benefits private providers. He also criticises the removal of criminal penalties and says the bill does not go far enough to enforce older people's rights.
“Following the Senate inquiry into this bill, I have some serious doubts as to whether universal access to aged care will be achieved through this legislation.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Jordon Steele-John opposes the bill, saying it leaves aged care rights unenforceable, fails to stop younger disabled people being placed in residential aged care, and bakes in weak guardianship rules. He says the Greens want the government to fix these problems in good faith and foreshadows an amendment on keeping young people out of aged care.
“In conclusion, there are so many issues in this bill at present that will affect the lives of millions of Australians. The Greens urge the government to work in good faith with older Australians to address these issues. I foreshadow a second reading amendment that I will be moving on behalf of the Greens in relation to keeping young people out of aged care.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Moved amendment
Steele-John opposes the bill because he says it goes against the aged care royal commission recommendation by creating a pathway for people under 65 to enter residential aged care. He moves an amendment calling on the government to implement that recommendation instead.
“(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,”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Elizabeth Watson-Brown Watson-Brown says the Greens will oppose the bill because it gives too much to for-profit aged-care providers, expands user-pays, and does not create enforceable rights for older Australians.
“For these reasons, the Greens will be opposing this bill in the House and reserving our final position in the Senate.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Minor parties and independents
14 speakers · 17 contributions · 10 support · 4 mixed
Minor parties and independents
14 speakers · 17 contributions · 10 support · 4 mixed
-
Allegra Spender ★ Spender supports the bill and says it is a significant step forward for reforming aged care, especially because it introduces a rights-based framework, stronger funding settings and more emphasis on home care.
“In conclusion, while I believe that this bill represents a good reform and a significant step forward, there is still further to go. We must continue to push for greater investment in the workforce, in particular. We must address long wait times for care and ensure that reforms are implemented in a way that truly benefits older Australians but also allows innovation and productivity growth in the sector.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Kylea Tink Kylea Tink says she and her community welcome the bill, because it modernises aged care with stronger rights, clearer standards and a more sustainable system.
“None of this is easy. The government has inherited a silo system of aged care on the one hand with complex practical independences on the other. On balance, my community and I welcome this bill. But, like others, I will be monitoring the rollout to ensure the community's expectations are met and that the promise of increased fairness, transparency and sustainability is being achieved across the board, from those who are most vulnerable to those who we are increasingly relying on to fund themselves.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Monique Ryan Ryan says the bill is real progress for aged care, but she warns it falls short on enforceable rights, disability support, culturally and linguistically diverse access, workforce training and other practical safeguards.
“In conclusion, while the Aged Care Bill 2024 does represent real progress in addressing the needs of Australia's aging population, it falls short in a number of critical areas, particularly in supporting people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds and those with a disability.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Rebekha Sharkie 2 contributions Sharkie says she supports the bill in principle, but argues it falls short because it does not create an independent complaints commissionerThe official responsible for handling aged care complaints and, in some amendments, issuing formal complaint determinations. and leaves major funding and accountability problems unresolved.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Rebekha Sharkie on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Sharkie says she supports the bill in principle, but argues it falls short because it does not create an independent complaints commissionerThe official responsible for handling aged care complaints and, in some amendments, issuing formal complaint determinations. and leaves major funding and accountability problems unresolved. She also wants earlier review provisions and more detail on how the new aged-care system will work in practice.
“While I support this bill in principle, I do believe that it misses the mark in some respects. I am disappointed the bill will not create an independent complaints commissioner. An independent complaints commissioner with teeth and a transparent complaints process are needed in order to best protect consumers' rights.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Sharkie says she will support the bill, because it carries important aged-care reforms such as better complaints handling, safeguards and rights-based protections. She argues, however, that it still leaves serious problems with home-care wait times, higher costs and implementation risks for older Australians.
“In conclusion, while I support this bill, and despite a royal commission, there are still many failings in how we deliver aged care in our nation. Overall, we need to do much, much better by our older Australians.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Helen Haines 2 contributions Helen Haines supports the bill as a significant step toward fixing aged care and implementing the royal commission’s reforms, but she says it is not perfect and wants changes on enforceable rights, whistleblower protections, review rights and workforce shortages.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Helen Haines on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Helen Haines supports the bill as a significant step toward fixing aged care and implementing the royal commission’s reforms, but she says it is not perfect and wants changes on enforceable rights, whistleblower protections, review rights and workforce shortages. She also backs the bill’s stronger regulation and home care reforms while warning they must work better for regional Australians.
“In conclusion, while this bill isn't perfect, it's a significant step towards fixing our aged-care system and a significant step towards learning the lessons of the royal commission and doing better by our mothers, our fathers, our aunts and uncles, our brothers and sisters and our friends and neighbours.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Haines supports the bill and says it is needed to help implement the aged-care reforms smoothly, including the new support-at-home changes. She backs it while criticising the government's delays and warning that long waitlists and workforce shortages are still hurting older people, especially in regional areas.
“I support this bill, but I take this opportunity to highlight serious deficiencies in the current home-care system, which my constituents are so very much relying on, before the new Aged Care Act and support-at-home system commences.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Zali Steggall Steggall supports the aged care bill and says it is a positive step toward better rights, home care and accountability for older Australians.
“Our older Australians deserve to live with dignity, and the new aged-care bill represents a positive step in addressing the challenges we face as a nation with an ageing population. However, much more needs to be done to ensure that all Australians receive the care and support they need in their senior years.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
David Pocock Pocock supports the bill and says it will help secure the future of aged care, but he wants amendments to improve transparency around assessment and home-care wait times.
“That's clearly why change is necessary, and that's why I'm supportive of what is being proposed today. We need a system that is available for the next generation and the generation after that. We need more funding entering the system to improve wages, quality standards and accommodation. In general terms, this bill delivers on that, helping to secure the future of the aged-care system and regear it so that it focuses on providing support to keep people at home for as long as possible.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Sophie Scamps Scamps supports the bill and says it is a necessary step to make aged care sustainable and rights-based, with universal access to clinical care remaining central.
“In summary, I support the aims of this bill. The system must be made sustainable and our elderly population must get the standard of care they deserve. The aim of universal access is critical. It is not perfect, but it is progress. I will continue to advocate for the government to continue their efforts to improve our aged-care system and support its residents. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Dai Le Dai Le supports the bill and welcomes the move to a rights-based aged-care model, saying it is a step forward and that reform is critical.
“This aged-care reform is critical for Australians, and I welcome the government's efforts in taking the steps to respond to the royal commission's report for a better aged-care system. Aged care being a rights based model is a step forward. I reiterate that it is important that these reforms be explicitly inclusive to the needs of the culturally and linguistically diverse ageing population, especially those in my electorate of Fowler.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Zoe Daniel Zoe Daniel says the aged care bill is a significant step forward, but she is not fully satisfied with it because the process was rushed and some safeguards and rights protections still fall short of what the royal commission envisaged.
“There is no doubt that this bill is a step forward, and a considerable step at that, for a sector that has been plagued with problems and scandals for decades. However, some of the remaining issues with the legislation could have been sorted out so that we wouldn't have legislation that will change once the Senate inquiry has concluded.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tammy Tyrrell Tyrrell supports the bill as a step forward for aged care, but says it still needs work on enforcement, provider oversight and stronger penalties.
“Even with flaws, I can see this bill is a step forward for the aged-care sector and that its intention is to better protect the rights of older Australians.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Kate Chaney 2 contributions Chaney supports the bill generally and will vote for it, but says its success will depend on implementation.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Kate Chaney on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Chaney says she will support the Aged Care Bill 2024 because it advances a rights-based, simpler aged-care system, but she wants the reforms to be simple, accessible and clearly explained to older Australians and their families. She backs the bill with caveats about how the new rules and changes will be implemented.
“That is why I'm happy to support this bill, with a few caveats.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Chaney supports the bill generally and will vote for it, but says its success will depend on implementation. She wants the government to watch for financial hardship, simpler access to support at homeThe home care program in this bill that helps older people pay for equipment, home changes, recovery care and end-of-life care at home., and better recognition and respite for unpaid carers.
“In conclusion, we need this updated aged-care act, and I support it generally. It has taken some time to get to this point, and whether it succeeds will be determined in its implementation. As my office continues to support constituents negotiating the system, I'll be looking out for how simple, accessible and user friendly the new system is; for how transparently people can find out how they'll be affected individually; for how funding changes affect individuals, ensuring that they do not create financial hardship; for how we protect the humanity of the new system; for the ease and availability of access to Support at Home packages and short-term restorative care; and for recognition of the role of unpaid carers and for availability of respite for people like Joyce.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Russell Broadbent Broadbent says he supports the Aged Care Bill 2024 and lets the coalition's backing stand, but argues the real problem is implementation because providers are not delivering the services that packages promise.
“Personally, I don't have a problem with where the Aged Care (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill is headed, and the coalition have already announced that they will be letting this bill go through on the voices.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
David Van Van says he supports the aged care bill only if it is amended to close a regulatory gap for digital care platforms.
“That's why I intend to move an amendment to the bill, the Aged Care Bill 2024, to close this gap.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Act title
- Aged Care Act 2024
- Act number
- Act No. 104, 2024
- Became law
- 02 Dec 2024
- Takes effect
- The whole of this Act A single day to be fixed by Proclamation
- Registered
- 04 Dec 2024
- Administered by
- Department of Health, Disability and Ageing
- Final law metadata was collected from the APH progress table; commencement rows were parsed from the bill text.
- Status
- Act -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- House of Representatives
- 12 Sept 2024
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
- 12 Sept 2024
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
- 08 Oct 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 08 Oct 2024
House · Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 09 Oct 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 10 Oct 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 06 Nov 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 07 Nov 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 07 Nov 2024
House · Returned to House for further consideration
Returned to House for further consideration
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 07 Nov 2024
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
- 07 Nov 2024
House · Consideration in detail: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
- 07 Nov 2024
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
- 18 Nov 2024
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
- 18 Nov 2024
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
- 19 Nov 2024
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 20 Nov 2024
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 21 Nov 2024
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 21 Nov 2024
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
- 21 Nov 2024
Senate · Committee of the whole: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
- 21 Nov 2024
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 27 to 6.
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
- 25 Nov 2024
House · Message from Senate reported
Message from Senate reported
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 25 Nov 2024
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agreed to Senate amendments
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
- 25 Nov 2024
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
- 02 Dec 2024
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, turning the bill into an Act.
Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (04/11/2024)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (16 Sept 2024): Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (4 Nov 2024)
APH bill page notes