15th May 2018

Consultations on where to spend Budget funds now open

FONT SIZE: A+ A-
Consultation open on Budget money
Ben Hocking

The Department of Health is seeking input from a wide range of aged care stakeholders to ensure new residential aged care places are located where they are most needed, particularly in respect to specific geographic locations, special needs and other key issue groups.

The Department of Health national consultation process began on Tuesday and aims to ensure that the thousands of new residential aged care places outlined in last week’s Federal Budget announcement end up where they are required.

Minister for Aged Care Ken Wyatt said a wide range of aged care stakeholders were invited to take part, to help inform the 2018–19 Aged Care Approvals Round (ACAR).

Funding for aged care will increase by $5 billion over the next four years, including money for 13,500 new residential aged care places, 775 short-term restorative care places and a further $60 million in capital investment, to be made available in this ACAR.



Mr Wyatt said the results of the consultation would help guide the distribution and targeting of new places and capital grants in each state and territory.

“We are keen to hear about the gaps in current aged care availability, not just in terms of locations but in terms of special needs and the requirements of particular groups, such as people from regional, rural and remote areas, and people living with dementia,” Mr Wyatt said.

National peak aged care organisations, aged care assessment teams, primary health networks, local councils, consumer groups and aged care approved providers are among those who will be invited to take part.

Organisations which are not initially invited to take part in the targeted consultations can access the survey by emailing the Department of Health at acar@health.gov.au.

The consultation period will close for submissions on 28 May.

Where would you like to see the Government spend the extra $5 billion of aged care funding? Should more money be spent on caring for dementia patients?

Related articles:
Budget eases major concern for retirees
Post-Budget, this is what counts
Our tax cuts are bigger than yours





COMMENTS

To make a comment, please register or login
Big Kev
16th May 2018
11:08am
It's not an extra $5 bill, it is money ripped out of residential care to pay for home care. 14,000 places when 105,000 are needed. This doesnt'tbeven take into account those on low care packages who need high care! Just to round it off there is no control over who and what seevices are delivered. Some providers give 8 hrs per week whilst others give 15 hrs. Some just usse Cwrt3 providers whilst others recognise at leasr some RN and Diversional Therapy time required.
TREBOR
16th May 2018
11:14am
Ah - can you show us that, Big Kev, about residential care and home care? The ex's daughter works at good remuneration in the home care arena - but for mostly mentally ill (what a job!).

I have no doubt that 105,000 places are needed.

My ex, BTW - gets home care for $127 a fortnight...one trip in the car costs nearly that much in real terms, so it's a good thing I don't eat much.
TREBOR
16th May 2018
11:09am
Every time I hear the name Kid Wyatt I cringe..... just saying......

I hope this will not be a repetition of the Commission Of Idiots, and will actually encompass the real views of real people out there, and not just rubber stamp the views of the 'experts in the field' who are already romping to the bank with literally billions.

Who exactly are these "wide range of aged care stakeholders"? Just another business opportunity to consult and lobby government for free? Or REAL stakeholders?

"National peak aged care organisations, aged care assessment teams, primary health networks, local councils, consumer groups and aged care approved providers "

The Usual Suspects... all with some form of vested interest or servants of the government. Pardon my cynicism.
Old Man
16th May 2018
4:03pm
Bit harsh Bob, Ken Wyatt seems to be on top of his portfolio and is respected in the Parliament. On the other hand Wyatt Roy lost his seat of Longman because he helped roll a sitting PM.
TREBOR
16th May 2018
6:06pm
Damn - I sliced the wrong Wyatt.... still... he's a Lib... can't be any good... (grinch, grinch)...
P$cript
20th May 2018
10:55am
This mob seem to do everything backwards, announced the funding and number of places, then have the consultation to try and make the budget announcement fit reality.
Big Al
16th May 2018
11:32am
You know, if you look back to the 1950's, (and yes, I know that is a mistake), families took a hell of a lot more responsibility for their elderly relatives, than happens today. In an age where we have massive expenditure on child care provision, as well as massive expenditure on aged care, of all forms, this has come about to free up women (mainly), to continue their career aspirations. Good thing or not? Well I suppose that depends on each person's perspective. Are families closer these days than in the 1950's? Well in my experience, they are certainly not.
TREBOR
16th May 2018
11:38am
Pensions and Newstart etc are Social Security - lumped in with them under the generic term 'welfare' (meant to disparage it as a whole) are the unspoken of childcare, PPL, and even aged care.

Out of those three I'd say the ONLY valid one, which should properly be included under Social security, is aged care.

The rest are luxury items and are weighing unnecessarily on the 'welfare' bill and thus creating the environment in which Pensions and Newstart (Nostart) etc are under attack on ideological grounds as 'unsustainabler'.

This is, in fact, a gross lie, since it is the spending by government on PPL, childcare, the accompanying un- and under-employment and the massive economic division for many that result, and such, that are long-term unsustainable, along with any number of other government expenditures.
MICK
16th May 2018
1:47pm
For the second time in the past week I find myself agreeing with you Al.
You are correct on your take but you need to look at society, genY in particular. Perhaps the other issue you may want to incorporate is the plundering of genY: predominantly low paid part time, job insecurity and an ingrained belief about rights and privilege.
I feel sorry for genYs as a group but they will have the last laugh as they enter politics and take control in the next 20 years. Boomers will find their finances under attack with nowhere to hide. Yeah...you would not agree. Your right....but recent history and seeing what is in the heads of this cohort are not real encouraging.
Big Al
16th May 2018
3:30pm
Mick, this is too (two?) much - you agreeing with me twice in the one week! Maybe with your "In" status at THC, and u being Unbekieva-Bill's right hand helper (or are you from the Centre or Left faction??), we could cobble together some bi-partisan policy to the betterment of us all> In relation to Health, for starters, we could start a UK style capitation system, where a GP is restricted to the number of patients she/he can have on their books at any one time. Not only will this assist with ensuring a more equitable distribution of health care providers throughout regional and rural Australia, it will also help the Health budget by making over servicing more easily identifiable. Don't get me started on specialists...
Now we have fixed Health, Mick, we can start on executive salaries. The bloke running Qantas reportedly too home a lazy $20m last year. I would like to see a system, where a CEO's salary is pegged to say, no more than 30 times that of his lowest paid full time staffer. So you would have to reckon a baggage handler may be down the bottom of the Qantas totem. Let's say he/she is on a base of $60k pa (before penalties). That by my calcs would mean the CEO would be limited to $1.8 million - not a bad salary? Could you talk to Bill sooner than later, Mick, and let,s get this implemented!
MICK
16th May 2018
4:24pm
As I have stated many times I am not associated with Labor or Liberal. My views may cross boundaries with those of Labor but then a (very) few are in the coalition camp as well. You will find me supporting Labor for no other reason than the mudslinging is unfair and frequently undeserved and there are rarely any facts. Just lies. Sort of gets me going. You?
Executive salaries? I have posted many times on this topic. These are a rort held up by the Boards and CEOs of institutions. Why? Because every company has a CEO wanting more money all the time....so you almost never oppose a pay deal if your company owns shares in another company. Eventually your turn comes. That is how it plays out but no side of politics is willing to take on the top end of town......but of course they do take on crooked unions. That's different? I suggest not.
Yeah Al, I saw Joyce's $20 million pay deal come through. Where is the political and media contempt and calls for changing the remuneration laws? Non existent. Just like our PM's offshore tax shelter.
It's a crooked world run by puppet politicians but until ordinary Australians put an end to it the game will continue. Step 1 is to educate people about who is working for whom.
Raphael
16th May 2018
1:17pm
Excellent news . Great to see the government consulting the folks who will use the facilities.
Government should be applauded for this budget initiative - money well spent
MICK
16th May 2018
1:41pm
Errrr..... no comment? Ok, not health related, but the $100 million allocated to women's equity/pay is right up there. I guess this decrepit government has to resort to buying votes now as it will not get in without some serious pork barrelling.
I was always of the opinion that proper government began with NEEDS and then the neverending list of those crying for funds needed to be RANKED and decisions made. OK....."proper government". I stand corrected. We do not have proper government. Just puppets.
Raphael
16th May 2018
2:29pm
another desperate comment from the labor troll
MICK
16th May 2018
4:24pm
From a deadset Liberal troll.
TREBOR
16th May 2018
6:11pm
Still waiting on how they reckon this 'women's equity' will work - by funding any number of parasitic little women's groups that actually achieve nothing but do a lot of jumping up and down and throwing out the chest ... or are they going to bite the bullet and dictate that women should be paid more per hour etc? Hand them all the top paying jobs with the best (lack of) hours? Pay them for all their time off for family?

Just to make sure they get the same as men even though they don't work.

We've endured forty years of AA/EEO now - and still the girls can't make the grade - I reckon it's time to call it quits and get on with living and allow everyone else the same right.
heemskerk99
16th May 2018
6:44pm
anybody else thinks labor mick and his gang-gang image sound more genuiner behind their mask?
TREBOR
16th May 2018
8:41pm
Grow up, heemie... your pre-school must be missing you.
MICK
16th May 2018
8:57pm
Brain dead,liberal party troll, smear & inuendo. = Heemsjerk.
A pity YLC does not can these posts.
GrayComputing
16th May 2018
3:03pm
The government can save a lot of money to be used for health. and improve our lot.

It is time for all of us to rant at our PMs to take action for human decency and a huge stress reduction for pensioners

NO ASSET TEST FOR A PENSION EVERV AGAIN!
A pension is not welfare.

Most economist say we will save taxpayers money by dropping asset testing because of the massive overheads cost in running Centrelink and the 10,000 conflicting rules
Even poorer New Zealand has a NO ASSET pension so it is cheaper and user friendly,

Do retired and retiring people really look forward and want 100++ visits to/from Centrelink and be part of 3 million waiting queues and lost calls?

Does your MP really like being part of the system that allows this indirect abuse of the elderly?

This abuse is actually sponsored by our government and forced down to Centrelink and borders on a criminal act.

Why do MPs normally compassionate persons let this Centrelink abuse happen at taxpayers’ expense?

Some opposition and independent MPs stand to lose their chance at being part of the needed government changes

We all need to tell our MP that these criminal asset tests for a pension must be dropped now.
NO ASSET TEST FOR A PENSION EVER AGAIN!
Knows-a-lot
16th May 2018
4:18pm
If the Lieberals are in charge, it'll be a catastrophe.
MICK
16th May 2018
4:26pm
That's what they are lining up. The media propaganda is already beginning. Watch None News and 13 News. Obvious dear Watson.
heemskerk99
16th May 2018
7:24pm
knows a lot of b.s. many Australian's be living in heaven if this proposal comes to fulfilment but just because it is a liberal proposal you have to show where your allegiances lie and reject it out of hand as is labor mick and his gang-gang while singing i am part of the union and could not care a stuff about the rest of Australia
MICK
16th May 2018
8:59pm
A message from the dictatorship in progress with money to burn on trolls.
ray from Bondi
16th May 2018
9:11pm
Yes, this is how government work, they crow about helping one sector, but neglect to mention that the other is then reduced by the same amount, much the same as when the single pension was increased, the funding the married pension for two was reduced by the to fund it, BUT the government went around flashing it feathers like a peacock bragging about pension increases, but if you were married you actually had a reaction, something very wrong with the Australian government and it is no surprise to me to read how people are losing faith in democracy.


Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

  • Receive our daily enewsletter
  • Enter competitions
  • Comment on articles