Aged Care Insite Issue 111 | Feb-March 2019 | Page 14

industry & reform Oakden whistleblower Barbara Spriggs and son Clive. Photo: James Elsby, AAP Aged Care Royal Commission A summary of the first hearing of the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. By Conor Burke DAY 1: FIRST WITNESSES CALLED “I’m sure if I had taken Bob to the Royal Adelaide Hospital in the state he was in, I would have been reported to the police.” That’s how Oakden whistleblower Barbara Spriggs recounted the injuries her late husband sustained at the infamous facility, as she gave her witness testimony to the aged care royal commission. Spriggs was the first witness to be called at the commission in Adelaide on Day 1, and at times she became emotional as she recalled the pain and suffering her late husband Robert ‘Bob’ Spriggs went through and the subsequent anguish felt by her and her children. Bob was 66 years old when he died in July 2016, after a battle with many illnesses, including Parkinson’s disease. Bob had two short stays at the Oakden facility in South Australia, one in January of 2016 and another in February of the same year, which according to Spriggs’ testimony, caused Bob’s health to decline dramatically. Before Spriggs was brought up to testify, counsel assisting Peter Gray started proceedings, and as he did so there was a brief moment where the room went dark. The light reappeared soon after, perhaps foreshadowing the revelations to come. 12 agedcareinsite.com.au In his slow, measured manner, Gray set out how the next two weeks will run, saying that these initial hearings will mainly provide context and background to the industry and that he does not expect the commissioners to rule on them. He told the commission that some of the 800 public submissions received so far have been harrowing, and that the commission is grateful for the bravery of those people. He told those in attendance that allegations against specific providers or individuals are for another time. Providers slow to respond From Gray’s opening, we also learnt that the Department of Health has forwarded any submissions it received when the commission was first announced – with some previously concerned that these may be lost or not considered. We also learned that, as of now, only 900 of the 2000 registered providers, and only 79 of the top 100, have responded to the commission with details of any instances of substandard care – a fact that will not be looked kindly upon by the commissioners. “We will follow up the providers who have not responded to the request to ensure it has been received and has been receiving proper attention,” Gray said. “As commissioner Briggs noted previously, providers who do not engage with our requests draw attention to themselves and to their practices. They will be subject to careful scrutiny.” Spriggs was eventually called to testify jointly with her son Clive. She used her time not to dwell on her family’s story, she told the commission, but to encourage others to come forward. Speaking is not easy, she cautioned, but “speaking out lifted the lid” on the abuse being committed. Spriggs spent most of her testimony outlining her views on the changes that need to occur in the sector. These include greater accountability, improved staffing – training, salaries and ratios – a database for staff who commit abuse or have complaints made against them, CCTV in common areas, and better end-of-life plans. View from the peaks COTA Australia chief executive Ian Yates spoke for most of the remainder of the day, covering topics ranging from over- medication, the difficulties regulators face catching misdeeds in facilities, to aged care funding and future improvements. In his witness statement, Yates told Gray that when it comes to funding aged care properly, “we don’t really know whether … the total amount that providers are receiving is adequate”. “And, in that context, what proportion should be paid for by the government, the taxpayer, which is, in the end, a subsidy to our care and in many cases to our accommodation, and what should be paid by individuals who have capacity to pay. And, at the moment, we do not have a coherent policy about that”. Using the Home Care Packages system Levels 1–4 as an example, Yates said that