Aged Care Taskforce Report has been released, responses are mixedAFTER a three-month wait, the final report of the Aged Care Taskforce was released in late March.
The Taskforce was set up to give advice on the future of funding for both home care and residential aged care.
These recommendations were always going to be somewhat controversial. Everyone knows that the aged care system needs a lot more money, but no one really wants to be the one to pay the piper.
Frustratingly, this problem has been a long time coming. Despite this, there have been no long-term plans put in place to ensure that our aged care system can provide better care for more people into the future as our population ages.
Currently, there isn’t enough funding to maintain a skilled workforce and deliver high quality care, problems that will only get worse as the need for aged care continues to increase.
Along with an ageing population, on average we are also living longer. In fact, Australia has one of the highest life expectancies in the world. By 2050, it is expected that the number of Australians aged 100 and over will increase by more than tenfold.
Whilst we are living longer, our health isn’t necessarily improving. In particular, the number of Australians with dementia is expected to more than double over the next thirty years.
It’s a wicked problem, and there are no easy fixes. The first and most difficult problem to solve is this: who should pay? Should the money come from the people who are receiving aged care services; should it come from taxes; or should it come from other sources?
Should aged care be funded like Medicare and the National Disability Insurance Scheme are, where you can access the services no matter what your income is?
The future of aged care funding
The final report of the Aged Care Taskforce is fairly in-depth, but there are a few recommendations that stand out.
Notably, the report ruled out a tax levy similar to Medicare as a means of funding aged care into the future. This was one of the 148 recommendations made by the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. The Aged Care Taskforce has instead recommended that people should pay more for aged care, promoting a ‘user pays’ system where the government subsidises the cost of care and little else.
People with more means would pay a higher percentage, and would be expected to fund accommodation and daily expenses such as meals with minimal government support.
The Taskforce argued that an ageing population means there will be less people paying income tax and that the ‘Baby Boomer’ generations are wealthier than the generations before and after them. As the superannuation system matures, it is expected that this trend will continue.
Of course, it is true in a general sense that people who are reaching retirement age now are wealthier than those who came before them, but this wealth isn’t evenly distributed. This is not something that is addressed in the report, beyond the general acknowledgement that there will always be some people for whom the Government will need to fund most of their care.
In fact, the Taskforce commissioned research on attitudes towards the cost of aged care. This study found that most people support a ‘user pays’ system, except for pensioners living in social housing.
This is not mentioned at all by the Taskforce, who instead indicated that there is broad support for higher individual contributions towards aged care.
In general, the report focused on people who have the means to pay and said little about those who do not. There is reference to a need to “ensure a strong safety net for low means participants” but it is left to the government to determine how best to address this need.
Along with recommending that people with more assets should pay more for care, the report also suggested that providers might offer extra services and amenities at higher cost to increase their profits.
It is concerning that this approach might leave those without means with a poorer quality lifestyle in residential aged care. Whilst we seem to have accepted this is a norm in our society, is this really something that we should allow to become embedded in our aged care system?
The Response
The Taskforce noted that there are complex issues at play, which require further thinking from government. Their role was to present options, which the government must then consider. Ultimately, the recommendations made by the report could be entirely ignored.
The Australian Government is yet to respond to the report formally, though both major parties have stated that they do not support a Medicare-style levy to fund aged care.
Other than that, the Government has made it clear that there will be no change to how the family home is assessed for aged care means testing.
What do you think? Find our short poll here.
If you have questions about aged care but don’t know who to ask, please get in touch with us and we will do our best to put you in touch with someone who can help.
More articles
Aged care star ratings: What are they, and do they mean anything?
Aged care: How a protected person protects the family home
Aged care report says you want to pay more
AFTER a three-month wait, the final report of the Aged Care Taskforce was released in late March.
The Taskforce was set up to give advice on the future of funding for both home care and residential aged care.
These recommendations were always going to be somewhat controversial. Everyone knows that the aged care system needs a lot more money, but no one really wants to be the one to pay the piper.
Frustratingly, this problem has been a long time coming. Despite this, there have been no long-term plans put in place to ensure that our aged care system can provide better care for more people into the future as our population ages.
Currently, there isn’t enough funding to maintain a skilled workforce and deliver high quality care, problems that will only get worse as the need for aged care continues to increase.
Along with an ageing population, on average we are also living longer. In fact, Australia has one of the highest life expectancies in the world. By 2050, it is expected that the number of Australians aged 100 and over will increase by more than tenfold.
Whilst we are living longer, our health isn’t necessarily improving. In particular, the number of Australians with dementia is expected to more than double over the next thirty years.
It’s a wicked problem, and there are no easy fixes. The first and most difficult problem to solve is this: who should pay? Should the money come from the people who are receiving aged care services; should it come from taxes; or should it come from other sources?
Should aged care be funded like Medicare and the National Disability Insurance Scheme are, where you can access the services no matter what your income is?
The future of aged care funding
The final report of the Aged Care Taskforce is fairly in-depth, but there are a few recommendations that stand out.
Notably, the report ruled out a tax levy similar to Medicare as a means of funding aged care into the future. This was one of the 148 recommendations made by the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. The Aged Care Taskforce has instead recommended that people should pay more for aged care, promoting a ‘user pays’ system where the government subsidises the cost of care and little else.
People with more means would pay a higher percentage, and would be expected to fund accommodation and daily expenses such as meals with minimal government support.
The Taskforce argued that an ageing population means there will be less people paying income tax and that the ‘Baby Boomer’ generations are wealthier than the generations before and after them. As the superannuation system matures, it is expected that this trend will continue.
Of course, it is true in a general sense that people who are reaching retirement age now are wealthier than those who came before them, but this wealth isn’t evenly distributed. This is not something that is addressed in the report, beyond the general acknowledgement that there will always be some people for whom the Government will need to fund most of their care.
In fact, the Taskforce commissioned research on attitudes towards the cost of aged care. This study found that most people support a ‘user pays’ system, except for pensioners living in social housing.
This is not mentioned at all by the Taskforce, who instead indicated that there is broad support for higher individual contributions towards aged care.
In general, the report focused on people who have the means to pay and said little about those who do not. There is reference to a need to “ensure a strong safety net for low means participants” but it is left to the government to determine how best to address this need.
Along with recommending that people with more assets should pay more for care, the report also suggested that providers might offer extra services and amenities at higher cost to increase their profits.
It is concerning that this approach might leave those without means with a poorer quality lifestyle in residential aged care. Whilst we seem to have accepted this is a norm in our society, is this really something that we should allow to become embedded in our aged care system?
The Response
The Taskforce noted that there are complex issues at play, which require further thinking from government. Their role was to present options, which the government must then consider. Ultimately, the recommendations made by the report could be entirely ignored.
The Australian Government is yet to respond to the report formally, though both major parties have stated that they do not support a Medicare-style levy to fund aged care.
Other than that, the Government has made it clear that there will be no change to how the family home is assessed for aged care means testing.
What do you think? Find our short poll here.
If you have questions about aged care but don’t know who to ask, please get in touch with us and we will do our best to put you in touch with someone who can help.
More articles
Aged care star ratings: What are they, and do they mean anything?
Aged care: How a protected person protects the family home
Aged care report says you want to pay more
