Many in the aged care and allied sectors should feel very satisfied with the Taskforce’s Final Report because it puts into words all the reasonable arguments and conversations that have taken place since the Tune report in 2017.
The Report shifts the ground in accepting the base operational facts of the sector and the challenge the Government has in funding quality care, looking forward to growing customer numbers and a shrinking tax base.
No more justification conversations are required.
The Report, in its synopsis, sums it up thus:
“The recommendations… support a sustainable, or financially sound, aged care system that is sustainable, fair and facilitates greater innovation in the sector... [which] is necessary to attract additional investment and ensure the sector is set up to deliver quality care for older people into the future.”
Words regularly used through the Report are: “fair”, “sustainable”, “as they have all their lives” when talking about the fairness of people paying for the accommodation and support services when they are in their own home.
“Co-contribution will be required for the things people have typically paid for their whole lives, such as daily living expenses and for those in residential care, accommodation costs.
“For providers, the recommendations support more predictable and sustainable funding and home care and increase capacity to cover the cost of delivering services in residential care.
“In home care, the Taskforce recommends greater clarity for participants and providers through clearly defined inclusion and exclusion principles and service lists.”
Thin markets will be looked after by the Government.
The Report recognises the power of the dollar and the market as well, for instance:
“Increased participants co-contributions… creating a direct incentive for participants to use only what they are assessed as needing.”
And: “Fee flexibility would enable residents to elect to pay for better or additional everyday services if they wished.”
In other words, the Taskforce recommends co-contribution for the 65% of people not on full Age Pensions and supports the argument with a graph showing 81% of people 75-plus own their own home.
What the Report doesn’t do is give facts and figures to help operators figure out their forward strategies. This may be smart to allow the Government a free run shaping its Budget in six weeks' time, and the Forward Estimates that impact the next four years.
The Report tips its hat that these are only recommendations for the Government. For instance, it says the following, and lets this statement just hang:
“If government chooses not to fully fund care, it may wish to review current arrangements for care fees, including the potential for removing annual caps and reviewing lifetime caps.”
For our money, the argument for co-contribution is now over. It is up to the Government to decide what it is prepared to implement electorally. The signs are that the Coalition is providing bipartisan support, which should make it easier.
There is a recommendation that a significant public education program be executed.
It is two years almost to the day that StewartBrown’s Grant Corderoy and we introduced the need for a Plan B, being co-contribution. Credit to the Government that they listened to the sector, did their polling research last February, formed the Taskforce and now have issued the recommendations openly, which in our book has created accountability.
Fair and sustainable is the expectation.
