We wish to raise an important and contentious issue – aged residential care. Over the past half a dozen or so years, countless councils have decided to hand this responsibility over to the private sector. In Victoria, literally only a handful of councils continue to maintain these services. Many reasons are behind this move:
- Increasing costs
- Increasing maintenance costs
- Accreditation challenges
- Adequate staffing costs
- Whether aged care should even be a local government responsibility
Glen Eira runs 3 accommodation sites providing 173 beds. For the past 2 years alone these facilities have incurred ‘deficits’ of just under $7m. This means that residents are basically subsidising aged care to the tune of approximately $3.5m each year. Is this warranted, much less sustainable?
Please note that we are not advocating any position – either to maintain this service, sell off the assets, or lease the beds to private hands. We believe that what needs to happen is full community consultation and for council to put all the facts on the table so residents can have a say in the decision making. Thus far this has not occurred. Council has been content to continue losing $3m plus per annum with no proper public announcement, no discussion, and no real explanation as to why this is occurring.
Given these losses it is perhaps fair to ask:
- Do residents believe that council has the expertise to run such an operation?
- Do residents believe that such losses per annum are ‘acceptable’ and warranted?
- Do residents believe that council should maintain its aged care facilities?
- Do residents believe that private operators can deliver a better service?
When the outcry is continually about cost shifting and rate capping and council after council cries poor, then surely it is time for an open discussion with the community on what the priorities should be. We hasten to add that not only does this apply to aged care but to many other aspects of council’s agenda. Until residents are given a say in determining budget priorities and how ratepayer monies should ideally be spent we are still captive to rule by an unelected bureaucracy!
Glen Eira Debates 
October 21, 2017 at 4:27 PM
I tried to get my father into the Spurway home years ago, and came to the conclusion it was a closed club and was being rorted by the favoured families in the know, it was all about what strings could pull for you. If you couldn’t do this, you didn’t get a foot in the door By the sounds of it nothing has changed.
October 22, 2017 at 9:05 AM
You are spot on. having an inside rail is essential for addmission. These are legacies from both the Caulfield and Moorabbin Councils. The costs will continue to rise. The losses probably exclude the admin cost within the town hall.
October 21, 2017 at 5:37 PM
Fair questions!
Majority didn’t want basketball court for Harleston. Now more money spent to consult cos they didn’t like what majority said.
No one asked if $280000 for lumps of concrete in our parks is good spendingor even if we really need this much less want it.
Noone asked if directors are worth how much they’re getting.
Plenty of waste in Glen Eira.
October 22, 2017 at 10:48 AM
One little detail buried in the annual report is council’s payment of well over $400,000 for the ‘termination’ of a senior officer’s contract and his payout. We are assuming that this refers to the departure of Paul Burke!
October 22, 2017 at 12:25 PM
Well spent
October 22, 2017 at 1:21 PM
All of this should be publicly available under Best Value Principles [Division 3 of Local Government Act]. Council according to the Act must have developed quality and cost standards, taken into account the best the private sector can offer, regularly report to and regularly consult the community in relation to the services it provides, achieve continuous improvement in the services it provides, and assess the value for money.
The operational loss *might* be offset by an increase in land value that Council could realize in the future by redeveloping the land into highrise “retirement villages”. Retirement villages are not considered to be residential buildings or dwellings and are therefore exempt from pesky height limits.
October 22, 2017 at 5:26 PM
Good idea. How about a 19 storey retirement village on the Warawee site in East Bentleigh. Make lots of money. We could engage Calvery Health as consultants.
October 23, 2017 at 6:02 PM
Team 2 Architects have stated that they have revised their drawings, reducing the height of the building by 30.2m. Cryptically they appear to seek something that is 10 storeys and “RL: 61.480”. They have NOT made the modified drawings publicly available. From my viewpoint the proposal remains prohibited, as the tower consists of a bunch of dwellings. Calling them “Independent Living Units” as the applicant does may be an attempt to disguise the truly residential nature of the tower. Further evidence of this is the failure of the original application to identify the tower as being a “retirement village”. Council of course has gone along with the charade.
October 22, 2017 at 5:37 PM
I have raised this matter before; attention Mayor Delahunty but no satisfactory response. It is a absolute disgrace that she thinks the residents of Glen Eira can help fund the ALP budget deficit. Glen Eira council have no experts in this field, but they continue to throw millions into a black whole. I am all for councils doing their bit but it must be what we expect councils to do versus what we expect State Government to do. What are the other councillors doing to reign in this over spend…..nothing sadly because they don’t have the back bone to do something… they have been given the responsibility by voters to address such matters but its easy to sweep it under the carpet?
October 22, 2017 at 7:07 PM
Carpet must be a foot thick with all bullshit that goes on in this council