Aged care royal commission
It appears that the overwhelming evidence taken by the Royal Commission point to a significant under-resourcing of aged care.
The evidence has highlighted the need to increase staff numbers, improve staff skill levels, appropriately reward the more highly skilled staff, improve respite care, and meet the need for additional home care. This is sound work by the commission.
In my opinion, what is missing though is any discussion about "who pays?". The full value of the commission will not be realised unless it can identify the additional funding sources that are acceptable to the community and affordable for aged care residents.
The new funding model for personal care is based on the Australian National Aged Care Classification tool, which is being trialled.
The proposal includes the removal of identified flaws in the Aged Care Funding Instrument, including the complex and time-consuming assessment process, as well as eliminating incentives not always found to be in the best interests of consumers.
One such impediment is the need to find up to $500,000 for the room, on top of the daily fee charges; this is especially difficult for those who cannot afford the full charge and pay a deposit and an interest charge of 5.77 per cent (maximum permissible interest rate, or MPIR) on the remainder.
In my case, my wife is in permanent residential care and I live at home. To my knowledge there has been no discussion about this issue at the royal commission.
The MPIR is updated quarterly in line with the movements in market interest rates, however the MPIR that applies for each resident is fixed on the day they agree to the accommodation price with the provider.
This is an anomaly of great concern.
Using a market-based interest rate ensures the daily payment amounts are sufficient to cover costs of providing accommodation. No one was thinking of the interest rate declining at the time of the legislation.
I am interested to hear of how the commission might deal with this cost impediment matter that affects so many aged care residents and their immediate family, and future residents.
W.C Collier, Golden Square
It is very deceiving coming along Schumakers Lane towards the Calder Highway at Maiden Gully .
It appears as if the intersection is across the highway on the other side on the service road. This is a huge optical illusion as it looks like the service road is actually the main highway.
The signage is very poor in alerting drivers that they are about to intersect with a very busy road.
This intersection needs attention please.
Jen Hocking, Kangaroo Flat
Just a quick note to say the intersection of Guys Hill Road and Tannery Lane in my opinion is very dangerous.
I have seen many, many drivers cross Tannery Lane without stopping or even pausing - most probably not concentrating after driving down the long stretch of Guys Hills Road.
I now avoid it where possible as I have seen it happen too many times.