Scott Lynda: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Scott Lynda: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17276] 
Dr LYNDA SCOTT (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 Today we heard that the Salvation Army is selling all its residential homes. I wonder what this Government has to say about that—this Government whose members when in Opposition professed to care so much about older New Zealanders. However today there is no comment from it as the Salvation Army following the example of Presbyterian Support Services decides to sell all its residential homes. Why is the Salvation Army selling up? Two years ago Dave Nelson brought a petition to the Health Committee about aged care and residential care that stated that his home which was mainly geriatric hospital beds could not keep going at the current rate of funding. The reason he could not keep going and said that they would have to cut care cut costs or close was this bill. 
This bill the Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill is the income and asset testing bill. It has a very long history with a promise that this Government made time and again to older New Zealanders to remove income and asset testing. The money it has put aside to increase the assets a person can keep is why the Salvation Army is selling all its homes and why Presbyterian Support Services has already sold all its homes. Kemp House says that it will have to cut corners or close because it has had so little increase in funding when increased costs have gone up that it cannot manage to deliver aged-care services at a level that it finds acceptable. So this Government which proposes that it really dislikes private providers is pushing all of aged care into the hands of private providers and that is because of this bill. 
Before I came to Parliament I worked as a geriatrician through the 1990s so I have a lot of experience of rest homes dementia units hospitals and the assessment of elderly people. I heard the promises from the Labour Party year after year up and down this country saying that it would get rid of income and asset testing. It started back in the early 1990s. The history of this bill is that we have an ageing population. In the early 1990s a lot of aged care was provided by local public hospitals. Over the 1990s public hospitals became a place to deliver acute-care services but not to deliver long-term care. During that time the decision was made to move people into the community rest homes hospitals and dementia units. 
In 1994 10 years ago $636 was the amount set by Jenny Shipley for hospital care. However when this Government came in no change was made to that amount. Previously rest homes used to subsidise the hospital section. Now unless there is a retirement village that can subsidise the rest home and the hospital section proprietors cannot afford to stay in business. They cannot afford to pay the wages the increased electricity and food costs or to keep paying medical expenses and the cost of taking people to doctors. Today The Salvation Army decided to pull out. 
We heard Labour say continually that it would get rid of income and asset testing. However this bill the Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill does not do that. In no way does it do that. What it does do is increase the level of assets that can be kept. A means test on income still will occur the regulations and the actual legislation remains and all that is changed is the amount that a person can keep when he or she goes into residential care. People may be able to keep more money but they will have to start paying for a whole lot more when they get into residential care. We will see a two-tier level. We will see that those homes that are paid the contract price only and provide only that level will go back to having more than one person in a room. I can bet anything one likes that that will be the only way unless rest homes can on-charge for extra services. That is what will happen I say to the Minister. If the Minister travels around the world he will see that aged-care services in New Zealand have been delivered at an extremely high standard. I have been to homes in the UK Australia and the USA where there are two three or four elderly people in one room—but not in this country.