Aged Care Legislation Amendment (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Aged Care Commissioner and Other Measures) Bill 2026
Mr RAE (Hawke—Minister for Aged Care and Seniors) (10:14): I present a supplementary explanatory memorandum to the bill, and I ask leave of the House to move government amendments (1) and (2) as circulated together. Leave granted. Mr RAE: I move government amendments (1) and (2) as circulated together: (1) Clause 2, page 2 (at the end of the table), add: 4.
Schedule 4 11 January 2027. 11 January 2027 (2) Page 60 (after line 22), at the end of the Bill, add: Schedule 4 — Additional review for prescribed entry decisions Aged Care Act 2024 1 Section 7 Insert: entry decision reviewer: see subsection 90D(4). prescribed entry decision: see section 90A. 2 Section 55 (after the paragraph beginning "For the service groups") Insert: ‚ A classification decision or a decision about an individual's priority category may be reviewed and changed in certain circumstances, at the request of certain approved needs assessors connected with the decision, and with the consent of the individual. 3 Subsection 78(1) (note) Omit "Note:", substitute "Note 1:". 4 At the end of subsection 78(1) Add: Note 2: Certain decisions under this subsection can be subject to additional review under Part 4A. 5 At the end of subsection 83(1) Add: Note: A classification decision can be subject to additional review under Part 4A. 6 At the end of subsection 86(1) Add: Note: Certain decisions under this subsection can be subject to additional review under Part 4A. 7 At the end of subsection 90(1) Add: Note: A decision under subsection 86(1) about an individual's priority category can be subject to additional review under Part 4A. 8 After Part 4 of Chapter 2 Insert: Part 4A — Additional review process for certain classification decisions and priority category decisions 90A Decisions subject to additional review (1) A decision by the System Governor for an individual for a classification type for a service group is a prescribed entry decision if subsections (2) and (3) apply to the decision.
(2) This subsection applies to the following: (a) a classification decision under section 78 for the individual for the classification type ongoing for the service group home support; (b) a decision under subsection 86(1) about the individual's priority category for: (i) the classification type ongoing for the service group home support; or (ii) the classification type short-term or ongoing for the service group assistive technology; or (iii) the classification type short-term for the service group home modifications.
(3) This subsection applies to a decision that meets the conditions (if any) prescribed by the rules. 90B Requesting additional review (1) A person may request the System Governor to review, under this Part, a prescribed entry decision for an individual if the person: (a) is an approved needs assessor; and (b) is authorised to make the decision; and (c) is employed or otherwise engaged (however described) by the entity that employed or engaged (however described) the approved needs assessor who provided the classification assessment report or prioritisation report for the decision.
Note: The request is taken to not have been made in certain circumstances: see section 90C. (2) The request may be made only if: (a) the individual consents to the request; and (b) the circumstances (if any) prescribed by the rules apply. Note: If a request for review of a prescribed entry decision is made under this Part, requests (including by the individual) for reconsideration of the decision under Division 2 of Part 2 of Chapter 8 are affected by section 90G (additional reviews—interaction with reconsiderations).
(3) The request must: (a) be made in writing and in the approved form; and (b) comply with the requirements (if any) prescribed by the rules. Timeframe for requests (4) The request must be given to the System Governor within the following period after the day the prescribed entry decision was made: (a) 7 days; (b) if the System Governor determines a longer period for the request than would otherwise apply under paragraph (a)—that period.
(5) The System Governor may, at the request of the person who requested the review, extend the period under subsection (4). 90C When request taken not to be made (1) A request under subsection 90B(1) is taken, for the purposes of this Act (other than paragraph 90G(2)(b) (days to be disregarded for reconsideration and review provisions)) to not have been made if: (a) the System Governor is satisfied that a requirement in this Part has not been met in relation to the request; or (b) the person who requested the review withdraws the request before it is decided under subsection 90E(2).
Note: For paragraph (a), examples of requirements that may not be met include the following: (a) the decision is not listed in subsection 90A(2); (b) the decision does not meet the conditions prescribed by the rules for the purposes of subsection 90A(3); (c) the person requesting the review does not meet the requirements in subsection 90B(1); (d) the circumstances prescribed by the rules for the purposes of paragraph 90B(2)(b) do not apply; (e) the request does not comply with the requirements prescribed by the rules for the purposes of paragraph 90B(3)(b).
(2) The System Governor must give the person who requested the review written notice that the request is taken to not have been made: (a) if paragraph (1)(a) applies—as soon as practicable after receiving the request; or (b) if paragraph (1)(b) applies—as soon as practicable after receiving the withdrawal. 90D Dealing with a request for additional review (1) This section applies if a request is made under subsection 90B(1) to the System Governor to review, under this Part, a prescribed entry decision for an individual.
(2) The System Governor must, as soon as practicable after receiving the request, give the person who requested the review written notice that: (a) states that the request has been received; and (b) specifies the day the request was received. Reviewing the prescribed entry decision (3) The System Governor must: (a) personally review the prescribed entry decision under section 90E; or (b) cause the prescribed entry decision to be reviewed under section 90E by a delegate of the System Governor who: (i) was not involved in making the decision; and (ii) occupies a position in the Department.
(4) The person who reviews the prescribed entry decision under section 90E is the entry decision reviewer. 90E Additional review — decision (1) This section applies if a request is made under subsection 90B(1) to the System Governor to review, under this Part, a prescribed entry decision for an individual. (2) The entry decision reviewer for the review must review the prescribed entry decision and decide to: (a) affirm the prescribed entry decision; or (b) vary the prescribed entry decision; or (c) set aside the prescribed entry decision and substitute a new decision.
Note: For the effect of the decision, see section 90G. Requirements for review and decision (3) In reviewing the prescribed entry decision and making a decision under subsection (2), the entry decision reviewer: (a) must have due regard to procedural fairness; and (b) must have regard to any material on which the prescribed entry decision was based that the entry decision reviewer considers relevant; and (c) may have regard to any matters prescribed by the rules as matters to which the entry decision reviewer may have regard; and (d) must act in accordance with the rules.
(4) Without limiting paragraph (3)(d), rules made for the purposes of that paragraph may prescribe criteria, methods or procedures relating to classification levels or priority categories. (5) If the entry decision reviewer decides under subsection (2) to vary or substitute the prescribed entry decision, that decision (as varied or substituted) must: (a) if that decision is a classification decision under section 78—be a classification level set out in the rules for the purposes of paragraph 81(2)(a); or (b) if that decision is a decision under subsection 86(1) about the individual's priority category—be a priority category prescribed by the rules for the purposes of paragraph 87(1)(a).
(6) To avoid doubt, in reviewing the prescribed entry decision and making a decision under subsection (2): (a) the entry decision reviewer does not need to follow the criteria, methods or procedures prescribed by the rules as mentioned in subsection 78(1) or 86(1) (as the case may be); and (b) if the entry decision reviewer decides under subsection (2) to vary or substitute the prescribed entry decision, that decision (as varied or substituted) does not need to meet the criteria: (i) if paragraph (5)(a) applies—set out for a classification level by the rules for the purposes of paragraph 81(2)(b); or (ii) if paragraph (5)(b) applies—prescribed for a priority category by the rules for the purposes of paragraph 87(1)(b).
Guidelines (7) The System Governor may, by notifiable instrument, make guidelines relating to any of the matters mentioned in this section. 90F Additional review — notice and date of effect Notice of decision (1) After an entry decision reviewer reviews a prescribed entry decision for an individual and makes a decision under subsection 90E(2), the entry decision reviewer must, within 14 days of making the decision, give written notice to: (a) the person who requested the review; and (b) the individual.
(2) The notice must set out the following: (a) the decision; (b) the day the decision was made; (c) the reasons for the decision. When decision takes effect (3) The decision takes effect: (a) unless paragraph (b) applies—on the day the decision was made; or (b) if the notice specifies a day as the day the decision takes effect (which must be a day on or after the day the prescribed entry decision took effect)—on that day. 90G Additional reviews — effect and interaction with reconsiderations Additional review decision has effect as if made under original provision (1) A decision under subsection 90E(2) on review of a prescribed entry decision has effect as if it had been made under the provision under which the prescribed entry decision was made.
Note 1: The decision (the additional review decision) under subsection 90E(2) is disregarded for the purposes of Part 2 of Chapter 8 (reconsideration and review): see paragraph (2)(a) of this section. Note 2: For the date of effect of the additional review decision, see subsection 90F(3). Note 3: The additional review decision does not have effect if (see subsection (5)): (a) the decision (the reconsideration decision) on a reconsideration of the prescribed entry decision under Part 2 of Chapter 8 is as favourable as, or more favourable than, the additional review decision (see subsections 564(4) and (6) (effect of reconsideration decision), and subsection (4) of this section); or (b) the Administrative Review Tribunal makes a decision on review of the reconsideration decision (see section 107 and subsections 108(2) and (4) of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (operation and effect of Administrative Review Tribunal's decision)).
Interaction with reconsideration provisions (2) In applying Part 2 of Chapter 8 (reconsideration and review of decisions) in relation to a prescribed entry decision: (a) disregard a decision (if any) under subsection 90E(2) on review of the prescribed entry decision (despite subsection (1) of this section); and (b) disregard a day during a period (if any) (the additional review period): (i) starting the day a request is made under subsection 90B(1) to review the prescribed entry decision; and (ii) ending the day notice of a decision on the request is given under subsection 90F(1), or notice that the request is taken to not have been made is given under subsection 90C(2).
Note: Paragraph (a) has the effect that a reconsideration of the prescribed entry decision under Part 2 of Chapter 8 is of the decision as made, and not of the decision as varied or substituted under subsection 90E(2). (3) A request under subsection 559(1) to reconsider the prescribed entry decision, that is made during the additional review period, is taken to have been made after that period.
Additional review decision prevails over decision on reconsideration if more favourable (4) If: (a) a decision (the additional review decision) under subsection 90E(2) is made on review of a prescribed entry decision for an individual; and (b) the prescribed entry decision is subsequently affirmed, varied or substituted (the reconsideration decision) on a reconsideration of the prescribed entry decision under Division 2 of Part 2 of Chapter 8; and (c) the additional review decision is more favourable for the individual than the reconsideration decision; despite subsections 564(4) and (6) (effect of reconsideration decision), the reconsideration decision does not have effect for the purposes of this Act (other than section 566 (review by the Administrative Review Tribunal)).
Note: If this subsection does not apply (for example, because the reconsideration decision is as favourable as, or more favourable than, the additional review decision for the individual), the reconsideration decision has effect instead of the additional review decision and the prescribed entry decision (see subsection 564(6) and subsection (5) of this section) on and from the time mentioned in subsection 564(4).
Additional review decisions otherwise subject to decisions on reconsideration or ART review (5) To avoid doubt, subsection (1) operates subject to: (a) subsections 564(4) and (6) (effect of reconsideration decision); and (b) section 107 and subsections 108(2) and (4) of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (operation and effect of Administrative Review Tribunal's decision). 9 At the end of subsection 559(1) Add: Note: If the reviewable decision is a prescribed entry decision, and a request is made under subsection 90B(1) to review the prescribed entry decision: (a) days in the additional review period mentioned in paragraph 90G(2)(b) are disregarded in applying this Part in relation to the prescribed entry decision; and (b) a request for reconsideration under this subsection of the prescribed entry decision made during the additional review period is taken to have been made after that period: see subsection 90G(3). 10 At the end of subsections 559(3), 560(5) and 562(5) Add: Note: In applying this Division in relation to a prescribed entry decision, days in the additional review period mentioned in paragraph 90G(2)(b) are disregarded if a request is made under subsection 90B(1) to review the prescribed entry decision. 11 Application The amendments made by this Schedule apply in relation to a prescribed entry decision made on or after the commencement of this item.
This Labor government is committed to building an aged-care system that delivers the care that older Australians need. This amendment establishes the capacity for an escalation pathway for home support assessment decisions. It will make a real difference to older people who have complex extenuating circumstances that don't fit neatly into existing assessment processes.
The integrated assessment tool is a critical component of the Single Assessment System, which was a key recommendation of the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. This amendment further improves that system. Where an older person's needs cannot be fully captured by the assessment, assessment organisations will be able to refer that assessment to the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing.
The system governor will then be able to substitute a different outcome where the case meets the criteria. The circumstances in which this applies will be set out in the Aged Care Rules. We'll take the time to consult on exactly what those criteria need to be to ensure that we're delivering a sustainable, workable pathway.
This sits alongside other work to strengthen our assessment system based on the experiences we've heard about from older Australians and those who care for them. Earlier this year, we made changes to the prioritisation system, Curate, which brought the average wait for someone assessed as 'high priority' down from just over two months to just over one. We made sure that people with MND are automatically treated as urgent.
We're enabling assessors to correct input errors in the tool, and the rapid review into the Support at Home prioritisation mechanism will tell us what else needs adjusting. At this stage, I acknowledge the constructive conversations I've had with the shadow minister, on behalf of the opposition. There are contributions in terms of how we further improve this system.
We have the member for Mayo, the member for Kooyong and the member for Curtin in the House, all of whom I have met with and discussed different elements of this system; I thank them for their constructive engagement as well. Consistent national rules are an essential feature of a fair, sustainable system. Assessment organisations, peak bodies, advisory group members and representative groups told us the system needed a way to deal with the exceptions to the rules.
This amendment continues the government's work of delivering a system that provides safe, dignified and high-quality aged care for every older Australian.