Government should provide ‘alternatives’
A consumer lobby group for older Australians is urging the federal government not to “blindly follow” the industry in rubber stamping the Productivity Commission’s aged care reform blueprint. National Seniors said while reform is welcomed and overdue, the government should provide alternatives to the more “unsavoury” Productivity Commission proposals.
A consumer lobby group for older Australians is urging the federal government not to “blindly follow” the industry in rubber stamping the Productivity Commission’s aged care reform blueprint.
National Seniors chief executive, Michael O’Neill, said while reform is welcome and overdue, he hoped the federal government would provide alternatives to the more “unsavoury” Productivity Commission proposals.
“A rubber stamp from industry does not mean government should blindly follow suit. More must be said around staffing, ageing at home and funding options,” Mr O’Neill warned.
“Ultimately, this is about the welfare of elderly, vulnerable people and unless staffing issues are addressed there will be no reform of aged care,” he added.
According to Mr O’Neill, Australians want a “transparent and easy-to-navigate” system.
“We want to know that qualified staff are always on hand to bathe and feed and toilet mum or dad. And, above all, we want to grow old at home in our local communities,” he said.
A survey of 1,800 National Seniors members, released last month, found only 46% had heard of the Productivity Commission’s reform blueprint. Of those, 90% admitted to knowing “a little” or “not much” about the proposals.
“In regard to financing, the sting in the tail is the inclusion of the family home in the assets test. About 70% of seniors surveyed flatly rejected this proposal,” Mr O’Neill said.
“This doesn’t mean they’re unwilling to contribute. In fact, three quarters had no problem with paying something towards their aged care. But when it comes to the family home, the message to government is ‘hands off’.”
