The Senate has passed legislation to reinstate human oversight to an aged care algorithm that has been described as “cruel” and “inhumane” by elderly Australians and their carers. The bill, co-sponsored by the Greens, the Coalition, and independent senator David Pocock, would allow assessors to override the algorithm’s decisions based on professional judgment. It now moves to the House of Representatives for approval.
Algorithm under scrutiny
The integrated assessment tool (IAT), introduced in November, determines the level of home support funding and care for elderly Australians. However, as revealed by Guardian Australia, the algorithm has frequently under-assessed individuals, leaving them without adequate care. Assessors were explicitly prohibited from overriding the tool when it made incorrect assessments. The bill aims to protect the discretion of assessors to make professional determinations about care.
Senator Penny Allman-Payne of the Greens criticized the government’s response, saying that “thousands” of cases have been affected by incorrect assessments. She argued that the government’s proposed changes, which would allow human override only in “extenuating circumstances,” do not go far enough. “This government clearly does not understand the consequences of their own policy,” she said during Senate debate.
Government concedes need for review
Aged care minister Sam Rae acknowledged on ABC’s Radio National that the algorithm may not fit all cases. “In some limited circumstances, people’s complex circumstances don’t necessarily fit neatly into a framework,” he said. Rae announced that in “extenuating circumstances,” decisions could be escalated to a system governor for review. However, it remains unclear how long this process would take.
Senator David Pocock expressed skepticism about the announcement, calling it an “eleventh-hour” move to avoid losing a vote. “If this change simply creates a new escalation pathway to the department after the algorithm gets it wrong, I struggle to see how it will materially address the concerns that have been raised,” he told Guardian Australia.
Broader concerns about algorithm use
The IAT has triggered hundreds of complaints to aged care advocacy services and calls for internal reviews, which can take months. The outgoing inspector general for aged care, Natalie Siegel-Brown, criticized the government’s reforms, stating that “clinical judgment informs the data entry, but not the decision.” She warned that the system is “fast-tracking” people’s entry into aged care.
Pocock also noted that the government has yet to implement the robodebt royal commission’s recommendations for guardrails on algorithm use and an independent expert body to evaluate automated decision-making. The bill’s passage through the Senate marks a significant step, but its enactment depends on approval in the lower house.
