Hikes in Care-Home Rates

Seniors housing, it's not about how many beds; it's about a commitment to consistency!

Its a new year and as I sit at my desk preparing to write this column, the first column of the year on Senior's housing, surrounded by mounds of research and reports, the thing that strikes me most, is the need for consistency.

If "all" parties are committed to "Seniors Housing" the question then becomes, "How?" Everything thing I read says "we are living longer," which means a greater need for long-term planning. Colin Hanson, BC's Finance Minister said "Social Spending is a bottomless pit" and he's probably right, however, it's spending on "us" as people! I'm not left or right, I'm just guy saying social spending is the right thing to do!

As people, we are not too much different from the housing we require. In the beginning we are new and strong, but as we age, we require more maintenance. However, we are people and the principle benefit of aging should be dignity and a principle point in that dignity element is housing that provides security, affordability and lifestyle.

Starring at me in the pile of recent articles is a Vancouver Sun column by Maureen Bader who wrote about leaving a legacy of debt, spending vs. taxes. She writes about the fear of the stealth tax hikes needed too feed government's ever-growing spending addictions.

Behind that, a column by John Bermingham of The Province regarding an October 14th, 2009 announcement by the provincial government stating it's commitments to temporary shelters, and behind that an article by Douglas Todd of the Vancouver Sun on Elder-care images, the differences between cultures, challenging that often repeated idea that western cultures are more prone to farming out our elders and that eastern cultures are not. It turns out we're not alone in the desire to see our parents in a proper and secure environment. The first implication being, that doing so is wrong, however speaking as one who has toured dozens of Seniors Housing properties, I'm not sure I agree with that implication at all. These facilities get better with every new structure.

Whatever the circumstance, after reading these and dozens more, what's really needed, is a complete and unyielding commitment to providing proper Seniors Housing for all who require it and/or want it!

On that note, the BC Care Providers Association has submitted a 10 point Action Plan to the BC Ministry of Health.

The second recommendation was: Consider alternative funding models and program delivery options! www.bccare.ca

The recommendation asks the government to separate care funding from accommodation costs and allow funding to follow the client eliminating the administration element of the health regions.

The plan calls for;
• Care providers to be approved/designated by health authorities
• seniors are assessed by the health authority to determine eligibility, need and care credits
• senior/family use care credits to chose care provider and select preferred service delivery model
• care credits apply only to care services
• housing & hospitality services subsidized separately through existing income support programs

This is a pilot project that can also encourage hospital replacement services such as rehab, emergency care, primary and community care directly at residential facilities.

Will it inspire a greater sector investment as it saves money for the health regions, we will have to see. However, needless to say we need more housing and applicable options as the boomers become seniors, beginning in 2011.

When the provinces oldest housing project Little Mountain was razed, the community lost 224 homes which will take a minimum of three years to replace. The provincial government has been committed to building 5,000 new units since 2001; the opposition says it will be 3,000 immediately, the feds are out there adding to the pot with HST, another horror story waiting to unfold at a time when even a single unit gain is a challenge.

In 1993, the Federal Government stop funding seniors housing and things have never been the same since. They need to get back in the game. Without them, those 224 homes that have to be replaced will take much longer to deliver than the projected 36 month minimum. The ball is firmly in the Prime Ministers court.

Whatever the circumstance, a consistent policy of growth in this sector is required, supported by all levels of government. This is a vital sector, a growing sector and a long-term employment delivering sector. It is a sector that creates opportunities for us to live longer in and if required, a place to work longer at.

Any sector cuts are a disadvantage to the community, to governments, their policies and their electorate as a whole. Social services maybe a bottomless pit, but they are about us as a people and it is the policy makers who must remember that and make good on that.

Live well and be involved,

David Hutchison