Newly proposed aged care structure to impact Aussies's wallets soon
- Replies 0
The Australian Senate recently passed a bill that could introduce a new fee structure for the country's aged care system.
As it was sent to the lower house for approval, the move sparked a mix of support and concern among residents and their families.
It's crucial for everyone, especially seniors, to understand the implications of these changes and how they could affect people's finances and care options.
The bipartisan support for the bill suggested a reform in the aged care sector.
The legislation should provide a more sustainable model for funding aged care by shifting some financial responsibilities from the government to those using the services.
This significant move reflected the growing pressures on the aged care system.
A daily resident fee of $100 would be introduced under the new structure.
The 'non-clinical care' fee should cover the costs of food and other non-medical amenities.
The maximum accommodation charge for residents would also increase, affecting many pensioners.
If the new system pushes through, three in ten full pensioners and three in four part pensioners might pay more.
The bill also proposed a revamp of the in-home care system, introducing a flexible, NDIS-style' budget'.
This care system should allow recipients to spend on approved services instead of sticking to a prescribed 'package'.
This change is designed to give recipients more control and choice over the care they receive.
However, these changes should not affect current aged care residents or those on waiting lists; they should only apply to future aged care residents.
Senate business manager Katy Gallagher described the bill as 'significant reform'.
'In this place, we pass laws that change the lives of individuals, and this will be one of those,' Ms Gallagher stated.
'It will improve the aged care system, no longer a system that's described as one of neglect but one that's person-centred, rights-based and provides new standards of care and choice for individuals who use it.'
The Coalition's aged care spokesperson, Anne Ruston, believed that the bill was significant.
'The choice and control and the power of how recipients get aged care hopefully with the passage of this bill is going to be vested in the hands of older Australians,' Ms Ruston said.
However, she also pointed out possible flaws and 'shortcomings' that the bill could face.
On the other hand, the Greens opposed the bill.
'Many older Australians will now be required to pay more without any enforceable rights to quality care,' Greens spokesperson Penny Allman-Payne said.
'If greater reliance on a user-pays model is the answer, then we're asking the wrong questions.'
Despite these concerns, the bill's proponents argue that rebalancing the cost of aged care is necessary to ensure the system's sustainability.
As of writing, the government's contribution to aged care costs significantly outweighs that of the recipients.
The government pays $3.30 for every $1 for recipients in residential care or $7.80 per $1 for those in-home care.
The new fee structure could save the government about $12.6 billion over 11 years.
As the bill moves to the lower house for final approval, it's a critical time for seniors and their families to review their plans and consider how these changes could impact their future care options.
What are your thoughts on the new aged care fee structure? Do you feel prepared for these changes, or are there concerns you'd like to share? Join the conversation and share your thoughts with us in the comments section below.
As it was sent to the lower house for approval, the move sparked a mix of support and concern among residents and their families.
It's crucial for everyone, especially seniors, to understand the implications of these changes and how they could affect people's finances and care options.
The bipartisan support for the bill suggested a reform in the aged care sector.
The legislation should provide a more sustainable model for funding aged care by shifting some financial responsibilities from the government to those using the services.
This significant move reflected the growing pressures on the aged care system.
Aged care recipients and their families may see a rise in their expenses should the bill turn into a law. Image Credit: Pexels/SHVETS Production
A daily resident fee of $100 would be introduced under the new structure.
The 'non-clinical care' fee should cover the costs of food and other non-medical amenities.
The maximum accommodation charge for residents would also increase, affecting many pensioners.
If the new system pushes through, three in ten full pensioners and three in four part pensioners might pay more.
The bill also proposed a revamp of the in-home care system, introducing a flexible, NDIS-style' budget'.
This care system should allow recipients to spend on approved services instead of sticking to a prescribed 'package'.
This change is designed to give recipients more control and choice over the care they receive.
However, these changes should not affect current aged care residents or those on waiting lists; they should only apply to future aged care residents.
Senate business manager Katy Gallagher described the bill as 'significant reform'.
'In this place, we pass laws that change the lives of individuals, and this will be one of those,' Ms Gallagher stated.
'It will improve the aged care system, no longer a system that's described as one of neglect but one that's person-centred, rights-based and provides new standards of care and choice for individuals who use it.'
The Coalition's aged care spokesperson, Anne Ruston, believed that the bill was significant.
'The choice and control and the power of how recipients get aged care hopefully with the passage of this bill is going to be vested in the hands of older Australians,' Ms Ruston said.
However, she also pointed out possible flaws and 'shortcomings' that the bill could face.
On the other hand, the Greens opposed the bill.
'Many older Australians will now be required to pay more without any enforceable rights to quality care,' Greens spokesperson Penny Allman-Payne said.
'If greater reliance on a user-pays model is the answer, then we're asking the wrong questions.'
Despite these concerns, the bill's proponents argue that rebalancing the cost of aged care is necessary to ensure the system's sustainability.
As of writing, the government's contribution to aged care costs significantly outweighs that of the recipients.
The government pays $3.30 for every $1 for recipients in residential care or $7.80 per $1 for those in-home care.
The new fee structure could save the government about $12.6 billion over 11 years.
As the bill moves to the lower house for final approval, it's a critical time for seniors and their families to review their plans and consider how these changes could impact their future care options.
