Opened the debate
Conaghan moved the motion, arguing that the transition to the Support at Home program had resulted in systematic failures for vulnerable older Australians. Conaghan claimed the Integrated Assessment Tool algorithm was unfit for use, producing questionable outcomes and lacking capacity for human override, which led to disputes and delays. Conaghan highlighted that over 200,000 older Australians faced unmet care needs due to long wait times and inadequate funding in the 2026-27 budget. Conaghan also noted that interim funding arrangements left recipients on partial support for months, and warned that removing regional loadings could reduce provider viability in rural areas. Conaghan called for increased packages, reduced waiting times, and the implementation of clinical oversight mechanisms.