部分属实

评分: 5.5/10

Coalition
C0277

声明内容

“从老年护理领域削减12亿澳元资金,随后否认这一行为。”
原始来源: Matthew Davis
分析时间: 30 Jan 2026

原始来源

事实核查

gāi gāi 核心hé xīn hé xīn 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng 涉及shè jí shè jí 斯科特sī kē tè sī kē tè ·· · 莫里森mò lǐ sēn mò lǐ sēn 担任dān rèn dān rèn 财政部长cái zhèng bù zhǎng cái zhèng bù zhǎng 期间qī jiān qī jiān 20152015 2015 -- - 20172017 2017 nián nián 以及yǐ jí yǐ jí 20162016 2016 -- - 1717 17 财年cái nián cái nián 预算yù suàn yù suàn zhōng zhōng 关于guān yú guān yú 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn de de 公告gōng gào gōng gào
The core claim references Scott Morrison's time as Treasurer (2015-2017) and the 2016-17 budget announcements regarding aged care funding.
1212 12 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 这一zhè yī zhè yī 数字shù zì shù zì 作为zuò wéi zuò wéi 特定tè dìng tè dìng 政策措施zhèng cè cuò shī zhèng cè cuò shī zài zài 事实上shì shí shàng shì shí shàng shì shì 准确zhǔn què zhǔn què de de dàn dàn jiāng jiāng 定性dìng xìng dìng xìng wèi wèi "" " 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn "" " 以及yǐ jí yǐ jí 莫里森mò lǐ sēn mò lǐ sēn de de 否认fǒu rèn fǒu rèn 需要xū yào xū yào 细致xì zhì xì zhì 分析fēn xī fēn xī [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] [[ [ 33 3 ]] ]
The $1.2 billion figure is factually accurate as a specific policy measure, but the characterization as a "cut" and Morrison's denial require nuanced analysis [1][2][3]. **What the $1.2 billion actually refers to:** In the 2016-17 budget, the Coalition government announced $1.2 billion in "efficiencies" over four years, primarily through changes to the Aged Care Funding Instrument (ACFI) scoring matrix—specifically targeting the Complex Health Care (CHC) component.
** * ** * 1212 12 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 实际shí jì shí jì zhǐ zhǐ de de shì shì 什么shén me shén me ** * ** *
This was intended to reduce perceived over-claiming by aged care providers [1][2][3]. **The critical distinction:** RMIT ABC Fact Check determined this claim was "misleading" because total Commonwealth spending on aged care actually increased despite these announced efficiencies [1].
zài zài 20162016 2016 -- - 1717 17 财年cái nián cái nián 预算yù suàn yù suàn zhōng zhōng 联盟党lián méng dǎng lián méng dǎng 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 宣布xuān bù xuān bù le le 四年sì nián sì nián nèi nèi 1212 12 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán de de "" " 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 提升tí shēng tí shēng "" " 措施cuò shī cuò shī 主要zhǔ yào zhǔ yào 通过tōng guò tōng guò 修改xiū gǎi xiū gǎi 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn 工具gōng jù gōng jù ACFIACFI ACFI 评分píng fēn píng fēn 矩阵jǔ zhèn jǔ zhèn 实现shí xiàn shí xiàn 特别tè bié tè bié shì shì 针对zhēn duì zhēn duì 复杂fù zá fù zá 医疗保健yī liáo bǎo jiàn yī liáo bǎo jiàn CHCCHC CHC 组成部分zǔ chéng bù fèn zǔ chéng bù fèn
In 2016-17, despite the $1.2 billion efficiency measure, total Commonwealth aged care funding rose by $1.1 billion in nominal terms compared to the previous year [1].
此举cǐ jǔ cǐ jǔ 旨在zhǐ zài zhǐ zài 减少jiǎn shǎo jiǎn shǎo 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 机构jī gòu jī gòu bèi bèi 认为rèn wéi rèn wéi 存在cún zài cún zài de de 过度guò dù guò dù 申报shēn bào shēn bào 行为xíng wéi xíng wéi [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] [[ [ 33 3 ]] ]
Analysis showed funding increased every year on an annual basis for at least the past decade [1].
** * ** * 关键guān jiàn guān jiàn 区别qū bié qū bié ** * ** *
RMITRMIT RMIT ABCABC ABC 事实shì shí shì shí 核查hé chá hé chá 认定rèn dìng rèn dìng 这一zhè yī zhè yī 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu "" " 误导性wù dǎo xìng wù dǎo xìng "" " 因为yīn wèi yīn wèi 尽管jǐn guǎn jǐn guǎn 宣布xuān bù xuān bù le le 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī 联邦lián bāng lián bāng zài zài 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 方面fāng miàn fāng miàn de de 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū 实际上shí jì shàng shí jì shàng réng réng zài zài 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
20162016 2016 -- - 1717 17 财年cái nián cái nián 尽管jǐn guǎn jǐn guǎn yǒu yǒu 1212 12 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán de de 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī 联邦lián bāng lián bāng 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn 名义míng yì míng yì shàng shàng 上一年shàng yī nián shàng yī nián 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā le le 1111 11 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
分析fēn xī fēn xī 显示xiǎn shì xiǎn shì zài zài 过去guò qù guò qù 至少zhì shǎo zhì shǎo 十年shí nián shí nián zhōng zhōng 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn 每年měi nián měi nián dōu dōu zài zài 逐年zhú nián zhú nián 增长zēng zhǎng zēng zhǎng [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]

缺失背景

gāi gāi 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng 遗漏yí lòu yí lòu le le 几个jǐ gè jǐ gè 重要zhòng yào zhòng yào de de 背景bèi jǐng bèi jǐng 因素yīn sù yīn sù
The claim omits several important contextual factors: 1. **Background to the measure:** The $1.2 billion efficiency announcement followed a $2.5 billion unexpected cost blowout in the Aged Care Funding Instrument between budget updates [1][2].
11 1 .. . ** * ** * 措施cuò shī cuò shī 出台chū tái chū tái de de 背景bèi jǐng bèi jǐng ** * ** * 1212 12 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī 公告gōng gào gōng gào 之前zhī qián zhī qián 预算yù suàn yù suàn 更新gēng xīn gēng xīn 期间qī jiān qī jiān 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn 工具gōng jù gōng jù 出现chū xiàn chū xiàn le le 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán de de 意外yì wài yì wài 成本chéng běn chéng běn 超支chāo zhī chāo zhī [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
The government stated these changes were in response to higher-than-expected growth in ACFI expenditure and attempts to address potential over-claiming by providers [1][2]. 2. **Total spending continued rising:** Despite the announced efficiencies, overall aged care spending increased.
政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 表示biǎo shì biǎo shì 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 变化biàn huà biàn huà shì shì 为了wèi le wèi le 应对yìng duì yìng duì ACFIACFI ACFI 支出zhī chū zhī chū 高于gāo yú gāo yú 预期yù qī yù qī de de 增长zēng zhǎng zēng zhǎng bìng bìng 试图shì tú shì tú 解决jiě jué jiě jué 机构jī gòu jī gòu 可能kě néng kě néng 存在cún zài cún zài de de 过度guò dù guò dù 申报shēn bào shēn bào 问题wèn tí wèn tí [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
Budget papers show estimated nominal spending rose by more than $1 billion per year from 2014-15 onwards [2].
22 2 .. . ** * ** * 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū 持续增长chí xù zēng zhǎng chí xù zēng zhǎng ** * ** * 尽管jǐn guǎn jǐn guǎn 宣布xuān bù xuān bù le le 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 总体zǒng tǐ zǒng tǐ 支出zhī chū zhī chū réng réng zài zài 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā
In real terms (inflation-adjusted), spending on aged care increased by between $679-796 million per year between 2014-15 and 2017-18 [2]. 3. **Policy justification:** The government framed this as "better targeting" of funding to address providers gaming the system by classifying residents in artificially high care categories [1][4].
预算yù suàn yù suàn 文件wén jiàn wén jiàn 显示xiǎn shì xiǎn shì 20142014 2014 -- - 1515 15 财年cái nián cái nián 估计gū jì gū jì 名义míng yì míng yì 支出zhī chū zhī chū 每年měi nián měi nián 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā 超过chāo guò chāo guò 1010 10 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
Professor David Hayward noted evidence that providers had been "gaming the system" by classifying people in higher care categories without justification to claim larger subsidies [1]. 4. **Offsetting investments:** The 2016 budget also included $102.3 million over four years to improve the viability supplement for regional aged care facilities [2]. 5. **Subsequent analysis showed complexity:** Industry analysis by Ansell Strategic projected the actual funding cuts to providers would exceed government estimates—approximately $2 billion over four years rather than the announced $1.2 billion, due to additional ACFI scoring changes [5].
àn àn 实际shí jì shí jì 价值jià zhí jià zhí jīng jīng 通胀tōng zhàng tōng zhàng 调整tiáo zhěng tiáo zhěng 计算jì suàn jì suàn 20142014 2014 -- - 1515 15 zhì zhì 20172017 2017 -- - 1818 18 财年cái nián cái nián jiān jiān 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 支出zhī chū zhī chū 每年měi nián měi nián 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā 6.796.79 6.79 -- - 7.967.96 7.96 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
This suggests the claim has merit regarding the magnitude of impact on providers, even if total government spending increased.
33 3 .. . ** * ** * 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè 合理性hé lǐ xìng hé lǐ xìng ** * ** * 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ jiāng jiāng 框架kuāng jià kuāng jià wèi wèi "" " 更好gèng hǎo gèng hǎo 定位dìng wèi dìng wèi "" " 资金zī jīn zī jīn 解决jiě jué jiě jué 机构jī gòu jī gòu 通过tōng guò tōng guò jiāng jiāng 老年人lǎo nián rén lǎo nián rén 划入huà rù huà rù 人为rén wéi rén wéi de de gāo gāo 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 类别lèi bié lèi bié lái lái zuān zuān 制度zhì dù zhì dù 空子kòng zi kòng zi de de 问题wèn tí wèn tí [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] [[ [ 44 4 ]] ]
大卫dà wèi dà wèi ·· · 海沃德hǎi wò dé hǎi wò dé 教授jiào shòu jiào shòu 指出zhǐ chū zhǐ chū yǒu yǒu 证据zhèng jù zhèng jù 表明biǎo míng biǎo míng 机构jī gòu jī gòu 一直yì zhí yì zhí zài zài "" " zuān zuān 制度zhì dù zhì dù 空子kòng zi kòng zi "" " zài zài 没有méi yǒu méi yǒu 正当理由zhèng dāng lǐ yóu zhèng dāng lǐ yóu de de 情况qíng kuàng qíng kuàng xià xià jiāng jiāng 老年人lǎo nián rén lǎo nián rén 划入huà rù huà rù 更高gèng gāo gèng gāo 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 类别lèi bié lèi bié 获取huò qǔ huò qǔ gèng gèng 大补贴dà bǔ tiē dà bǔ tiē [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
44 4 .. . ** * ** * 抵消dǐ xiāo dǐ xiāo xìng xìng 投资tóu zī tóu zī ** * ** * 20162016 2016 nián nián 预算yù suàn yù suàn hái hái 包括bāo kuò bāo kuò 四年sì nián sì nián nèi nèi 1.0231.023 1.023 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 用于yòng yú yòng yú 改善gǎi shàn gǎi shàn 地区dì qū dì qū 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 机构jī gòu jī gòu de de 可行性kě xíng xìng kě xíng xìng 补充bǔ chōng bǔ chōng 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
55 5 .. . ** * ** * 后续hòu xù hòu xù 分析fēn xī fēn xī 显示xiǎn shì xiǎn shì de de 复杂性fù zá xìng fù zá xìng ** * ** * AnsellAnsell Ansell StrategicStrategic Strategic de de 行业háng yè háng yè 分析fēn xī fēn xī 预测yù cè yù cè duì duì 机构jī gòu jī gòu de de 实际shí jì shí jì 资金zī jīn zī jīn 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn jiāng jiāng 超过chāo guò chāo guò 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 估计gū jì gū jì 由于yóu yú yóu yú 额外é wài é wài de de ACFIACFI ACFI 评分píng fēn píng fēn 变化biàn huà biàn huà 四年sì nián sì nián 内约nèi yuē nèi yuē wèi wèi 2020 20 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán ér ér fēi fēi 公告gōng gào gōng gào de de 1212 12 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán [[ [ 55 5 ]] ]
zhè zhè 表明biǎo míng biǎo míng gāi gāi 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng zài zài 机构jī gòu jī gòu shòu shòu 影响yǐng xiǎng yǐng xiǎng 程度chéng dù chéng dù shàng shàng 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu 合理性hé lǐ xìng hé lǐ xìng 即使jí shǐ jí shǐ 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū 有所增加yǒu suǒ zēng jiā yǒu suǒ zēng jiā

来源可信度评估

** * ** * 原始yuán shǐ yuán shǐ 来源lái yuán lái yuán TheThe The NewNew New DailyDaily Daily ** * ** * TheThe The NewNew New DailyDaily Daily shì shì yóu yóu PrivatePrivate Private MediaMedia Media GroupGroup Group 拥有yōng yǒu yōng yǒu de de 左翼zuǒ yì zuǒ yì 在线zài xiàn zài xiàn 新闻xīn wén xīn wén 出版物chū bǎn wù chū bǎn wù
**Original source (The New Daily):** The New Daily is a left-leaning online news publication owned by Private Media Group.
虽然suī rán suī rán 确实què shí què shí 发布fā bù fā bù 事实shì shí shì shí 新闻报道xīn wén bào dào xīn wén bào dào dàn dàn 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu 明确míng què míng què de de 编辑biān jí biān jí 立场lì chǎng lì chǎng 倾向qīng xiàng qīng xiàng 支持zhī chí zhī chí 工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng 通常tōng cháng tōng cháng 负面fù miàn fù miàn 框架kuāng jià kuāng jià 呈现chéng xiàn chéng xiàn 联盟党lián méng dǎng lián méng dǎng 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè
While it does publish factual news reporting, it has a clear editorial perspective favoring Labor and typically frames Coalition policies negatively.
gāi gāi 文章wén zhāng wén zhāng 准确zhǔn què zhǔn què 报道bào dào bào dào le le 莫里森mò lǐ sēn mò lǐ sēn de de 愤怒fèn nù fèn nù 否认fǒu rèn fǒu rèn dàn dàn duì duì 技术细节jì shù xì jié jì shù xì jié de de 分析fēn xī fēn xī 有限yǒu xiàn yǒu xiàn [[ [ 66 6 ]] ]
The article accurately reports Morrison's angry denial but provides limited analysis of the technical details [6]. **Fact-checking sources found:** - RMIT ABC Fact Check (October 2018): Mainstream, independent fact-checker with strong reputation.
** * ** * 发现fā xiàn fā xiàn de de 事实shì shí shì shí 核查hé chá hé chá 来源lái yuán lái yuán ** * ** *
Found the claim "misleading" [1] - The Conversation FactCheck (October 2018): Peer-reviewed fact-check finding the claim requires nuance [2] - Crikey (September 2018): Right-leaning commentary; concluded Morrison was correct while noting the government did announce efficiency measures [7] The most credible independent sources (RMIT ABC and The Conversation) both concluded the claim was misleading or required significant qualification.
-- - RMITRMIT RMIT ABCABC ABC 事实shì shí shì shí 核查hé chá hé chá 20182018 2018 nián nián 1010 10 yuè yuè 主流zhǔ liú zhǔ liú 独立dú lì dú lì de de 事实shì shí shì shí 核查hé chá hé chá 机构jī gòu jī gòu 声誉shēng yù shēng yù 良好liáng hǎo liáng hǎo
认定rèn dìng rèn dìng gāi gāi 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng "" " 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu 误导性wù dǎo xìng wù dǎo xìng "" " [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
-- - TheThe The ConversationConversation Conversation 事实shì shí shì shí 核查hé chá hé chá 20182018 2018 nián nián 1010 10 yuè yuè jīng jīng 同行tóng háng tóng háng 评审píng shěn píng shěn de de 事实shì shí shì shí 核查hé chá hé chá 认定rèn dìng rèn dìng gāi gāi 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng 需要xū yào xū yào 细微xì wēi xì wēi 解读jiě dú jiě dú [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
-- - CrikeyCrikey Crikey 20182018 2018 nián nián 99 9 yuè yuè 右翼yòu yì yòu yì 评论píng lùn píng lùn 刊物kān wù kān wù 结论jié lùn jié lùn 认为rèn wéi rèn wéi 莫里森mò lǐ sēn mò lǐ sēn shì shì 正确zhèng què zhèng què de de 同时tóng shí tóng shí 指出zhǐ chū zhǐ chū 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 确实què shí què shí 宣布xuān bù xuān bù le le 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī [[ [ 77 7 ]] ]
zuì zuì 可信kě xìn kě xìn de de 独立dú lì dú lì 来源lái yuán lái yuán RMITRMIT RMIT ABCABC ABC TheThe The ConversationConversation Conversation jūn jūn 认定rèn dìng rèn dìng gāi gāi 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu 误导性wù dǎo xìng wù dǎo xìng huò huò 需要xū yào xū yào 重大zhòng dà zhòng dà 限定xiàn dìng xiàn dìng
⚖️

工党对比

** * ** * 工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng zài zài 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn 方面fāng miàn fāng miàn 是否shì fǒu shì fǒu 存在cún zài cún zài 类似lèi sì lèi sì 问题wèn tí wèn tí
**Did Labor have similar aged care funding issues?** Labor's record on aged care funding shows different approaches but similar complexity: 1. **Labor's expansion vs Coalition restraint:** Under Labor (2007-2013), aged care funding increased significantly.
** * ** *
However, Labor also grappled with cost control issues in aged care provision [2]. 2. **No equivalent Labor "cuts" claim:** The research found no equivalent claim that Labor "cut" aged care funding by a specific dollar amount during their period in government.
工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng zài zài 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn 方面fāng miàn fāng miàn de de 记录jì lù jì lù 显示xiǎn shì xiǎn shì chū chū 不同bù tóng bù tóng de de 做法zuò fǎ zuò fǎ dàn dàn 同样tóng yàng tóng yàng 复杂fù zá fù zá
Labor's approach emphasized expanding care options rather than restraining costs through efficiency measures. 3. **Post-2022 Labor government:** Following the 2022 election, the Labor government announced major aged care reforms in response to the Royal Commission findings, but these represented new policy initiatives rather than responses to previous "cuts." The distinction is important: both parties have grappled with aged care affordability and provision, but the specific framing of Morrison's actions as categorical "cuts" while overall spending rose is what makes the original claim misleading.
11 1 .. . ** * ** * 工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng de de 扩张kuò zhāng kuò zhāng vsvs vs 联盟党lián méng dǎng lián méng dǎng de de 节制jié zhì jié zhì ** * ** * zài zài 工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng 执政zhí zhèng zhí zhèng 期间qī jiān qī jiān 20072007 2007 -- - 20132013 2013 nián nián 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn 大幅dà fú dà fú 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā
然而rán ér rán ér 工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng zài zài 努力nǔ lì nǔ lì 应对yìng duì yìng duì 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 提供tí gōng tí gōng zhōng zhōng de de 成本chéng běn chéng běn 控制kòng zhì kòng zhì 问题wèn tí wèn tí [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
22 2 .. . ** * ** * 没有méi yǒu méi yǒu 类似lèi sì lèi sì de de 工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng "" " 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn "" " 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng ** * ** * 研究yán jiū yán jiū 发现fā xiàn fā xiàn zài zài 工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng 执政zhí zhèng zhí zhèng 期间qī jiān qī jiān 没有méi yǒu méi yǒu 类似lèi sì lèi sì de de 关于guān yú guān yú 工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng "" " 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn "" " 特定tè dìng tè dìng 金额jīn é jīn é 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn de de 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng
工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng de de 方法fāng fǎ fāng fǎ 强调qiáng diào qiáng diào 扩大kuò dà kuò dà 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 选择xuǎn zé xuǎn zé ér ér fēi fēi 通过tōng guò tōng guò 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī 抑制yì zhì yì zhì 成本chéng běn chéng běn
33 3 .. . ** * ** * 20222022 2022 nián nián hòu hòu de de 工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ ** * ** * 20222022 2022 nián nián 大选dà xuǎn dà xuǎn hòu hòu 工党gōng dǎng gōng dǎng 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 宣布xuān bù xuān bù le le 针对zhēn duì zhēn duì 皇家huáng jiā huáng jiā 委员会wěi yuán huì wěi yuán huì 调查结果diào chá jié guǒ diào chá jié guǒ de de 重大zhòng dà zhòng dà 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé dàn dàn 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 代表dài biǎo dài biǎo xīn xīn de de 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè 举措jǔ cuò jǔ cuò ér ér fēi fēi duì duì 先前xiān qián xiān qián "" " 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn "" " de de 回应huí yìng huí yìng
这一zhè yī zhè yī 区别qū bié qū bié hěn hěn 重要zhòng yào zhòng yào 两党liǎng dǎng liǎng dǎng dōu dōu zài zài 努力nǔ lì nǔ lì 应对yìng duì yìng duì 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ de de 负担fù dān fù dān xìng xìng 提供tí gōng tí gōng 问题wèn tí wèn tí dàn dàn jiāng jiāng 莫里森mò lǐ sēn mò lǐ sēn de de 行为xíng wéi xíng wéi 定性dìng xìng dìng xìng wèi wèi 绝对jué duì jué duì "" " 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn "" " ér ér 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū què què zài zài 上升shàng shēng shàng shēng 这一zhè yī zhè yī 具体jù tǐ jù tǐ 框架kuāng jià kuāng jià 正是zhèng shì zhèng shì 原始yuán shǐ yuán shǐ 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu 误导性wù dǎo xìng wù dǎo xìng de de 原因yuán yīn yuán yīn
🌐

平衡视角

** * ** * 支持zhī chí zhī chí gāi gāi 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng de de 理由lǐ yóu lǐ yóu 批评者pī píng zhě pī píng zhě 观点guān diǎn guān diǎn ** * ** *
**The case for the claim (what critics argue):** Critics point out that even if total government spending increased, the announced $1.2 billion efficiency measure represented real reductions in funding *to providers*, particularly for residents with complex health care needs [5].
批评者pī píng zhě pī píng zhě 指出zhǐ chū zhǐ chū 即使jí shǐ jí shǐ 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā 宣布xuān bù xuān bù de de 1212 12 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī réng réng 代表dài biǎo dài biǎo duì duì ** * 机构jī gòu jī gòu ** * de de 实际shí jì shí jì 资金zī jīn zī jīn 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn 特别tè bié tè bié shì shì duì duì 复杂fù zá fù zá 医疗保健yī liáo bǎo jiàn yī liáo bǎo jiàn 需求xū qiú xū qiú de de 老年人lǎo nián rén lǎo nián rén [[ [ 55 5 ]] ]
Ansell Strategic's analysis indicated the combined effect of announced efficiencies plus additional ACFI changes would exceed $2 billion in provider funding reductions over four years [5].
AnsellAnsell Ansell StrategicStrategic Strategic de de 分析表明fēn xī biǎo míng fēn xī biǎo míng 宣布xuān bù xuān bù de de 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī 加上jiā shàng jiā shàng 额外é wài é wài de de ACFIACFI ACFI 变化biàn huà biàn huà 四年sì nián sì nián nèi nèi duì duì 机构jī gòu jī gòu 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn de de 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn jiāng jiāng 超过chāo guò chāo guò 2020 20 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán [[ [ 55 5 ]] ]
From a provider's perspective, this constituted a genuine funding cut that threatened service quality and sector viability [5].
cóng cóng 机构jī gòu jī gòu 角度看jiǎo dù kàn jiǎo dù kàn zhè zhè 构成gòu chéng gòu chéng le le duì duì 服务质量fú wù zhì liàng fú wù zhì liàng 行业háng yè háng yè 生存能力shēng cún néng lì shēng cún néng lì de de 真正zhēn zhèng zhēn zhèng 资金zī jīn zī jīn 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn 威胁wēi xié wēi xié [[ [ 55 5 ]] ]
The fact that Morrison "denied" the cuts while simultaneously announcing them added to perceptions of dishonesty. **The government's justification (what supporters argue):** The Coalition argued they were not "cutting" aged care funding because total Commonwealth spending continued to rise and per-resident spending increased [1][2].
莫里森mò lǐ sēn mò lǐ sēn 一边yī biān yī biān "" " 否认fǒu rèn fǒu rèn "" " 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn 一边yī biān yī biān 同时tóng shí tóng shí 宣布xuān bù xuān bù 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 措施cuò shī cuò shī 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā le le 人们rén men rén men duì duì 不诚实bù chéng shí bù chéng shí de de 观感guān gǎn guān gǎn
The efficiency measures were characterized as correcting for over-claiming and better targeting resources to genuine need, not abandoning aged care [1].
** * ** * 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ de de 辩解biàn jiě biàn jiě 支持者zhī chí zhě zhī chí zhě 观点guān diǎn guān diǎn ** * ** *
The government was addressing a $2.5 billion cost blowout in the ACFI system that had emerged between budget updates [1].
联盟党lián méng dǎng lián méng dǎng 辩称biàn chēng biàn chēng 由于yóu yú yóu yú 联邦lián bāng lián bāng 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū 继续jì xù jì xù 增长zēng zhǎng zēng zhǎng 人均rén jūn rén jūn 支出zhī chū zhī chū zài zài 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā 因此yīn cǐ yīn cǐ 他们tā men tā men 并未bìng wèi bìng wèi "" " 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn "" " 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
Morrison's "denial" can be interpreted as rejecting the characterization that absolute cuts occurred when spending was increasing overall [1]. **Expert analysis:** - **RMIT ABC Fact Check:** Concluded the claim was "misleading" because an adjustment to future spending does not represent a "cut" when overall spending continues to rise [1] - **The Conversation FactCheck:** Confirmed absolute government spending increased but noted that "although aged care spending has increased, it would have increased more but for the Government's actions" [2] - **Grattan Institute (Stephen Duckett):** Stated it was "more or less inevitable" spending would rise due to Australia's ageing population; the issue was whether the rate of increase was adequate [1] **Key context:** This represents a genuine semantic and policy disagreement.
效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī bèi bèi 定性dìng xìng dìng xìng wèi wèi 纠正jiū zhèng jiū zhèng 过度guò dù guò dù 申报shēn bào shēn bào 更好gèng hǎo gèng hǎo jiāng jiāng 资源zī yuán zī yuán 针对zhēn duì zhēn duì 真实zhēn shí zhēn shí 需求xū qiú xū qiú ér ér fēi fēi 放弃fàng qì fàng qì 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
If one measures "cutting" as reducing absolute government spending, no cut occurred.
政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 正在zhèng zài zhèng zài 解决jiě jué jiě jué 预算yù suàn yù suàn 更新gēng xīn gēng xīn 期间qī jiān qī jiān ACFIACFI ACFI 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng 出现chū xiàn chū xiàn de de 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 成本chéng běn chéng běn 超支chāo zhī chāo zhī 问题wèn tí wèn tí [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
If one measures it as reducing the rate of increase, providing less than would otherwise have been spent, or reducing provider revenue, then a reduction occurred.
莫里森mò lǐ sēn mò lǐ sēn de de "" " 否认fǒu rèn fǒu rèn "" " 可以kě yǐ kě yǐ 理解lǐ jiě lǐ jiě wèi wèi 拒绝接受jù jué jiē shòu jù jué jiē shòu 绝对jué duì jué duì 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn 发生fā shēng fā shēng de de 定性dìng xìng dìng xìng ér ér 总体zǒng tǐ zǒng tǐ 支出zhī chū zhī chū 正在zhèng zài zhèng zài 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety (announced during this controversy) later found systemic problems in aged care, but these predated the 2016 funding measure and reflected broader systemic issues rather than consequences of that specific policy [8].
** * ** * 专家zhuān jiā zhuān jiā 分析fēn xī fēn xī ** * ** *
-- - ** * ** * RMITRMIT RMIT ABCABC ABC 事实shì shí shì shí 核查hé chá hé chá ** * ** * 结论jié lùn jié lùn 认为rèn wéi rèn wéi gāi gāi 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu "" " 误导性wù dǎo xìng wù dǎo xìng "" " 因为yīn wèi yīn wèi duì duì 未来wèi lái wèi lái 支出zhī chū zhī chū de de 调整tiáo zhěng tiáo zhěng 代表dài biǎo dài biǎo "" " 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn "" " dāng dāng 总体zǒng tǐ zǒng tǐ 支出zhī chū zhī chū 继续jì xù jì xù 增长zēng zhǎng zēng zhǎng shí shí [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
-- - ** * ** * TheThe The ConversationConversation Conversation 事实shì shí shì shí 核查hé chá hé chá ** * ** * 确认què rèn què rèn 绝对jué duì jué duì 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 支出zhī chū zhī chū 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā dàn dàn 指出zhǐ chū zhǐ chū "" " 尽管jǐn guǎn jǐn guǎn 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 支出zhī chū zhī chū 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā 如果rú guǒ rú guǒ 没有méi yǒu méi yǒu 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ de de 行动xíng dòng xíng dòng 支出zhī chū zhī chū huì huì 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā gèng gèng duō duō "" " [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
-- - ** * ** * GrattanGrattan Grattan 研究所yán jiū suǒ yán jiū suǒ 斯蒂芬sī dì fēn sī dì fēn ·· · 克特kè tè kè tè ** * ** * 表示biǎo shì biǎo shì 由于yóu yú yóu yú 澳大利亚ào dà lì yà ào dà lì yà 人口老龄化rén kǒu lǎo líng huà rén kǒu lǎo líng huà 支出zhī chū zhī chū 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā "" " 或多或少huò duō huò shǎo huò duō huò shǎo shì shì 不可避免bù kě bì miǎn bù kě bì miǎn de de "" " 问题wèn tí wèn tí 在于zài yú zài yú 增长速度zēng zhǎng sù dù zēng zhǎng sù dù 是否shì fǒu shì fǒu 充足chōng zú chōng zú [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
** * ** * 关键guān jiàn guān jiàn 背景bèi jǐng bèi jǐng ** * ** * zhè zhè 代表dài biǎo dài biǎo le le 真正zhēn zhèng zhēn zhèng de de 语义yǔ yì yǔ yì 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè 分歧fēn qí fēn qí
如果rú guǒ rú guǒ àn àn 减少jiǎn shǎo jiǎn shǎo 绝对jué duì jué duì 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 支出zhī chū zhī chū lái lái 衡量héng liáng héng liáng "" " 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn "" " 没有méi yǒu méi yǒu 发生fā shēng fā shēng 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn
如果rú guǒ rú guǒ àn àn 降低jiàng dī jiàng dī 增长速度zēng zhǎng sù dù zēng zhǎng sù dù 提供tí gōng tí gōng 原本yuán běn yuán běn 应有yīng yǒu yīng yǒu de de 更少gèng shǎo gèng shǎo 资金zī jīn zī jīn huò huò 减少jiǎn shǎo jiǎn shǎo 机构jī gòu jī gòu 收入shōu rù shōu rù lái lái 衡量héng liáng héng liáng 确实què shí què shí 发生fā shēng fā shēng le le 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn
皇家huáng jiā huáng jiā 委员会wěi yuán huì wěi yuán huì duì duì 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 质量zhì liàng zhì liàng 安全ān quán ān quán de de 调查diào chá diào chá zài zài 争议zhēng yì zhēng yì 期间qī jiān qī jiān 宣布xuān bù xuān bù 后来hòu lái hòu lái 发现fā xiàn fā xiàn 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 存在cún zài cún zài 系统性xì tǒng xìng xì tǒng xìng 问题wèn tí wèn tí dàn dàn 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 问题wèn tí wèn tí 早于zǎo yú zǎo yú 20162016 2016 nián nián 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn 措施cuò shī cuò shī 反映fǎn yìng fǎn yìng de de shì shì gèng gèng 广泛guǎng fàn guǎng fàn de de 系统性xì tǒng xìng xì tǒng xìng 问题wèn tí wèn tí ér ér 非该fēi gāi fēi gāi 具体jù tǐ jù tǐ 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè de de 后果hòu guǒ hòu guǒ [[ [ 88 8 ]] ]

部分属实

5.5

/ 10

gāi gāi 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng 包含bāo hán bāo hán 真实zhēn shí zhēn shí de de 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè 要素yào sù yào sù 20162016 2016 -- - 1717 17 财年cái nián cái nián 宣布xuān bù xuān bù le le 1212 12 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī dàn dàn 整体zhěng tǐ zhěng tǐ 定性dìng xìng dìng xìng 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu 误导性wù dǎo xìng wù dǎo xìng
The claim contains a true factual element ($1.2 billion efficiency measure was announced in 2016-17) but is misleading in its overall characterization.
zhè zhè 1212 12 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 代表dài biǎo dài biǎo de de shì shì ACFIACFI ACFI 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn 公式gōng shì gōng shì de de 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ // / 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè 调整tiáo zhěng tiáo zhěng ér ér fēi fēi 联邦lián bāng lián bāng 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū de de 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn 后者hòu zhě hòu zhě 实际上shí jì shàng shí jì shàng 持续chí xù chí xù 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
The $1.2 billion represents efficiency/policy changes to the ACFI funding formula, not cuts to total Commonwealth spending, which continued to increase [1][2].
莫里森mò lǐ sēn mò lǐ sēn de de "" " 否认fǒu rèn fǒu rèn "" " 基于jī yú jī yú 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 绝对jué duì jué duì 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 支出zhī chū zhī chū 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā ér ér fēi fēi 减少jiǎn shǎo jiǎn shǎo de de 事实shì shí shì shí [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
Morrison's "denial" was based on the fact that absolute government spending on aged care increased, not decreased [1].
然而rán ér rán ér gāi gāi 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng zài zài 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ ** * 机构jī gòu jī gòu ** * de de 实际shí jì shí jì 影响yǐng xiǎng yǐng xiǎng 方面fāng miàn fāng miàn 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu 合理性hé lǐ xìng hé lǐ xìng 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 机构jī gòu jī gòu 即使jí shǐ jí shǐ 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā réng réng 面临miàn lín miàn lín 真实zhēn shí zhēn shí de de 资金zī jīn zī jīn 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn [[ [ 55 5 ]] ]
However, the claim has merit regarding the real impact on aged care *providers*, who faced genuine funding reductions even if government spending totals rose [5].
双重shuāng chóng shuāng chóng 事实shì shí shì shí 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā ér ér 机构jī gòu jī gòu 资金zī jīn zī jīn yīn yīn 公式gōng shì gōng shì 变化biàn huà biàn huà bèi bèi 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn 使shǐ shǐ zhè zhè 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng 变得复杂biàn dé fù zá biàn dé fù zá 双方shuāng fāng shuāng fāng dōu dōu yǒu yǒu 部分bù fèn bù fèn 有效性yǒu xiào xìng yǒu xiào xìng dàn dàn 原始yuán shǐ yuán shǐ 指控zhǐ kòng zhǐ kòng de de 框架kuāng jià kuāng jià 缺乏quē fá quē fá 关键guān jiàn guān jiàn 背景bèi jǐng bèi jǐng 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu 误导性wù dǎo xìng wù dǎo xìng
The dual truth—government spending increased overall while provider funding was reduced through formula changes—makes this a complex claim where both sides have partial validity, but the original claim's framing is misleading without critical context.

📚 来源与引用 (7)

  1. 1
    abc.net.au

    abc.net.au

    Opposition Leader Bill Shorten says that Prime Minister Scott Morrison cut aged care funding by $1.2 billion in his first budget as treasurer. RMIT ABC Fact Check found that claim to be misleading.

    Abc Net
  2. 2
    theconversation.com

    theconversation.com

    Prime Minister Scott Morrison has defended the Coalition’s spending on aged care as preparations for a Royal Commission into the sector get underway. We asked the experts to crunch the numbers.

    The Conversation
  3. 3
    thenewdaily.com.au

    thenewdaily.com.au

    Prime Minister Scott Morrison has angrily denied cutting $1.2 billion in aged care funding as he announced a royal commission into the sector.

    Thenewdaily Com
  4. 4
    crikey.com.au

    crikey.com.au

    The claim that the Coalition cut funding from aged care is a bald-faced lie, and one that points to the problems with a royal commission into the sector.

    Crikey
  5. 5
    ansellstrategic.com.au

    ansellstrategic.com.au

    In a Nutshell: The Impact of Budget Cuts to Aged Care #2 Summary: In our first analysis of the impacts of the 2016 Budget, we described an unbalanced budget that sought to find short term savings from a sector that urgently requires greater investment. Our clinical and operations team has now had the opportunity to comprehensively evaluate the […]

    Ansell Strategic
  6. 6
    thenewdaily.com.au

    thenewdaily.com.au

    Thenewdaily Com

  7. 7
    agedcare.royalcommission.gov.au

    agedcare.royalcommission.gov.au

    Agedcare Royalcommission Gov

评分方法

1-3: 不实

事实错误或恶意捏造。

4-6: 部分属实

有一定真实性,但缺乏背景或有所偏颇。

7-9: 基本属实

仅有微小的技术性或措辞问题。

10: 准确

完全经过验证且客观公正。

方法论: 评分通过交叉参照政府官方记录、独立事实核查机构和原始文件确定。