Garth George weighs in on the gold card today in the Herald. While the debate rages about the merits of Winston’s senior card and whether cheaper rinses and jetboat rides are worth all the fuss, I’m tempted to tell my gran what she’s been telling me for years: don’t look a gift-horse in the mouth (unless you’re an Aussie in which case it’s probably wise).
What’s National’s plan for seniors? A return to asset testing for residential care and cuts to Super.
Screw that. I think I’ll have that gold card instead thanks.
A couple of weeks ago we had Key promising “better funding” for aged care through more partnerships with the private sector a mere three months after voting against the largest investment *ever* into the health of older people and hedging on whether “better funding” actually means a return to National’s previous policy of asset testing the elderly. (Hint: it does.)
While Key gets to make the promises English is the man who has to find the cash – and there’s a lot of it tied up in Super. Bill recently told the Herald:
“If you compare ourselves with Australia – and it’s not too much different with any other developed country – we are starting to look pretty heavily committed to retirement income… The Australian pension is tightly income- and asset-tested and at a lower income… Ours is the highest level of the public pension that you will find anywhere, and paid to everybody.”
So, your call gran: lightweight gold card or asset testing and cuts to your Super.