Labor backs down on irreversible age care algorithm
People will be allowed to override a controversial automation tool that determines aged care assessments after complaints that the decisions cannot be reversed.
The federal minister responsible insists AI is not being used to decide the level of care people receive in their homes.
The government’s Integrated Assessment Tool was introduced in November to distribute funding more fairly, with algorithms deciding how much money to allocate to people.
More than 1,000 people demanded a review of their claims, while there were numerous complaints that the decision was irreversible.
Aged Care Minister Sam Rae agreed on Thursday that changes will be made to allow decisions made due to extenuating circumstances to be reviewed.
He said the changes would make the aged care system fairer but denied computer systems only determine support levels
“There is no artificial intelligence in our aged care evaluation system and it is dishonest for any actor to claim otherwise,” he told parliament.
“We will continue to ensure Australians receive the best care, that’s what they deserve.”
A bill introduced by the Liberals, Greens and independent senator David Pocock that would bring human oversight back to the vehicle has passed the Senate.
However, the bill will not pass because the Labor Party, which voted against the law, has enough numbers to block the law in the House of Representatives.
Opposition health spokeswoman Anne Ruston said the government was ignoring the needs of older Australians.
“These are people, not numbers on a piece of paper,” Senator Ruston told reporters.
“All a government coming to power in 2022 promising to put care back into aged care has done is short-change older Australians.”
The Older Persons Advocacy network welcomed the changes to the tool, with its chief executive Craig Gear saying the algorithm had caused confusion.
“These assessments have a real impact on an older person’s life, so it is very important that a person remains part of the decision-making and outcomes,” he said.
“Many details need to be clarified and consulted, including ways to appeal a decision. Given the complex needs of older people, changes must accommodate an older person’s changing circumstances.”
