Today I’m excited to be launching Labour’s Aged Care policy. I started working on this policy the instant it was allocated to me a few months ago and it’s been full-steam ahead since then.
To get an idea of the issues, ideas and concerns surrounding Aged Care I’ve met with people from all across the sector, all across the country. It’s been fascinating. I’ve spoken at Grey Power branch meetings, with the Aged Care Association, the Retirement Villages Association, Age Concern, the Service and Food Workers Union, Career Force, Presbyterian Support, the Human Rights Commission, those in the health sector like Alzheimer’s New Zealand and Arthritis New Zealand plus many members of the public. With that much input you start to build a picture of the sector pretty quickly and the insight of everyone involved has been invaluable.
This insight plus ideas from within the Labour Party have all contributed to the policy I’m proud to be releasing today.
The funding and delivery of aged care in New Zealand faces significant strain as our population is ageing and costs are rising. This requires a comprehensive, well thought out and long-term government plan of action, which this government is showing no signs of creating.
Labour’s plan includes:
• Government-funded training for all aged care staff
• Minimum staffing levels for nurses and caregivers and
• When government finances allow, pay parity between aged carers and their equivalents in the public health system.
Additionally, a Technical Working Party to be set up by Labour will investigate all the recommendations in the ‘What the Future Holds for Older New Zealanders’ report which Labour produced last year with Grey Power and the Greens, and the Auditor General’s Home-based support services for older people report.
The working party will report back on the recommendations by May 2012. It will then be tasked to chart the way for a New Model of Service Delivery, which Labour believes is essential for New Zealand to meet the growing challenges in the aged care sector.
Labour has a strategic and long-term plan for the aged care sector and the values and drive to implement it. Aged care in the future needs to be built on the values of accessibility, dignity and respect for all older New Zealanders, underpinned by transparency and accountability in the way the services are provided.
Update: For the full press release on Labour’s Aged Care policy please use this link.
so the policy is to spend a whole lot more money. Seems to me a typical Labour solution for everything. What do Labour want to acheive with this policy. This post does not make it at all clear, or where any funding will come from.
Words are cheap. Your policy for 9 years in power (next term…’) was for a Level 3 hospital at Kenepuru (Porirua) to serve an area stuffed with low-income and elderly people.
Those people have to travel to Wellington for emergency and/or complex treatment, a trip of over an hour for much of the catchment. Then, if they are fortunate enough to be taken in by ambulance, about 60% of them are turned out onto the streets after a few hours. Including at night, in the rain, no public transport, no money.
Annette King promised us this, loudly and repeatedly, for 9 years.
Why should we believe you now?
Looks good Steve, we need good policy for aged-care with impending baby-boomer retirements. Keep it coming!
@annie… so the fact that the first few years of any labour government is spent trying to deal with the worst of the messes left behind by yet another morally and intellectually bankrupt national govt has absolutely no bearing on reality?
the closures, and deliberate neglect perpetrated by the bolger/shipley govt has no bearing?
so, i can take it as read that because the labour govt wasn’t able to fix all of the issues deemed important, for whatever reason, instantly means that they are failing?
if that is the yardstick people insist on using, then what are we doing electing national govts at all? maybe national voters should be petitioning for merlin the wizard to be pm…then we can have all our problems sorted by a simple wave of his magic wand….
to listen to the trained parrots in news rooms around the country, you could be forgiven for assuming instant fixes are a realistic expectation, and that old pink eyes really can work miracles just by waving and smiling at the problems….
unfortunately, this is the real world, and no matter how much the self deception goes on, it isn’t going to go away..no matter how hard guyon and paul try to convince themselves otherwise….
it’s past time supposedly intelligent people started using reality rather than bigotry and ignorance as a basis for decisions affecting the future health of our country..
How many prioities can a party have?
Definition of priority is:
1.
the state or quality of being earlier in time, occurrence, etc.
2.
the right to precede others in order, rank, privilege, etc.; precedence.
3.
the right to take precedence in obtaining certain supplies, services, facilities, etc., especially during a shortage.
4.
something given special attention.
No 3 seems to be relevant….. What other “priorities” will be getting dumped?
Could you add about not letting TVNZ muck around with Coronation Street? Even better could you require those who organise and run their programming by TV ratings to acknowledge there are people in NZ over 49 years old?
I’m not being trivial. There is serious agism in many sectors, not just the media.
Ha. TVNZ is being ageist by moving a TV show to an earlier time slot. Good one.
@Steve Love the out clause ‘when finances allow’. The way your lot are spending you should be honest and say never!
Darrenw, sorry but can you remind me what the current deficit is under National? … and how much has our debt increased under them?
Wake up, Labour are offering a fiscally responsible plan, which is why Steve uses the words “when finances allow”. We’re looking at some tough times over the next few years, at least Labour are willing to admit that.
Yee haa! Better aged care!
!
The policy could do with a good jolt of
a) recognising and working with the way different cultures view elders e.g Pacific Islanders and Maori
b) recognising the existence of GLBTT seniors and their needs
By recognising that PI/Maori prefer to keep elders/aged as part of the family, and developing a strategy that supports those families with appropriate support services is far cheaper than creating rest homes/hospital services.
Recognising the existence of GLBTT seniors and their needs and developing appropriate strategies will ensure the mental and physical health and wellbeing of such seniors, and saves money in terms of lower hospitalisations for various ailments etc.
Steve, looking at your link on asset testing old people”“I can categorically rule out any changes to this sensible and fair Labour policy,” Steve Chadwick said.”:
No, the policy isn’t fair. In the first place, it is simply discrimatory that asset tests for residential care apply specifically to those over 65 who are forced into residential care whereas those between 50 and 65 are exempt.
In the second place spouses on the outside are asset-stripped and left without the means to support themselves for the future. Funding the spouse on the inside takes precedence over the spouse on the outside and she ends up in poverty. A more reasonable approach would be to deem 50% of the assets to be owned by the spouse on the inside, not 100%.
Being put into residential care isn’t a choice – much like prison. However even the spouses of prisoners are not asset stripped to pay for the inmate’s care. The whole thing’s a rort on old people.
Yee Haw ! ! !
If this cradle to the grave system Made those able to work work, instead of extorting more & more from the near minority of tax payers, maybe there would be plenty for those that really needed help & let our elderly that have paid tax all their working lives live better with better aged care benefits.
The thought of working 45 years supporting left leaning voters to prop up their benefits while leaving me & mine struggling with nothing or less is not how I thought it would be when I started @ 15years old…………
Bea makes a very valid point.
“a Level 3 hospital at Kenepuru (Porirua) to serve an area stuffed with low-income and elderly people.” How has this project advanced over the last 3 yearsunder national, whichmakes me ask the following;
Givent he unlikelihood of Labour getting close to Government in November, and your distatse for their past performance, who would you turn to to represent your voice in these concerns? That’s MY dilemna, who speaks for anyone outside Labour and National? ACT have taken to eating their young, I don’t agree with all Green policy (but then I don’t agree with all Labour, National, ACT policy etc) – Peter Dunne the perenial chameleon gets a precious seat in Parliament to speak for Peter Dunne.
What distinguishes this Labour policy from the policy put forward by its National Party counterpart is the focus on the tens of thousands of lowly-paid caregivers who work in the community and in residential facilities to support many NZers in their 80s and 90s to live a fulfilled and enjoyable life.
The Labour/Green report “What the Future Holds for Older NZers”, which was published following meetings of older people around the country, puts this very starkly.
A commitment to doing something about the status of these caregivers, including introducing mandatory minimum qualifications and paying them a decent minimum wage, would do a lot for not just these workers but the older people they are supporting.
Asset testing for over 65s is definately ageist. No other group in our community who require nursing/medical care are expected to fund it themselves. Also the more well-off have all their assets tied up in trusts or gift their homes to their children to keep them out of the equation – you can guarantee they won’t be paying for their place in the rest home.
Worse however, is the situation of those of us who choose to keep our elederly parents at home to be cared for. Lots of talk by everyone about how much the elderly do remaining in the community and how much support should be given to families who do this but let me tell it does not translate into adequate financial or practical support to make this possible. There is a huge discrepancy in the amount of funds the government is willing to release to resthome and elderly care hospitals (privaely owned of course) and the amount that is available to families to provide support for caring for elderly relatives in the community.