具有误导性

评分： 4.0/10

报告问题
Coalition
C0714

声明内容

“削减25亿澳元老年护理项目资金，例如上门送餐服务（Meals On Wheels）。”
新冠疫情
原始来源： Matthew Davis

原始来源

✅ 事实核查

关于guān yú guān yú 联盟党lián méng dǎng lián méng dǎng 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ "" " 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 项目xiàng mù xiàng mù 资金zī jīn zī jīn "" " 的de de 说法shuō fǎ shuō fǎ ，， ， 需要xū yào xū yào 仔细zǐ xì zǐ xì 审视shěn shì shěn shì 20142014 2014 -- - 20162016 2016 年nián nián 期间qī jiān qī jiān 实际shí jì shí jì 发生fā shēng fā shēng 的de de 情况qíng kuàng qíng kuàng 。。 。
The claim that the Coalition government "cut $2.5 billion from aged care programs" requires careful examination of what actually occurred in the 2014-2016 period. **The $2.5 billion figure originated from an Ansell Strategic report** commissioned by aged care peak bodies (UnitingCare Australia, Aged & Community Services Australia, and Catholic Health Australia) in 2016 [1].
 ** * ** * 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 这一zhè yī zhè yī 数字shù zì shù zì 源自yuán zì yuán zì AnsellAnsell Ansell StrategicStrategic Strategic 报告bào gào bào gào ** * ** * ，， ， 该gāi gāi 报告bào gào bào gào 由yóu yóu 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 行业háng yè háng yè peakpeak peak bodiesbodies bodies （（ （ UnitingCareUnitingCare UnitingCare AustraliaAustralia Australia 、、 、 AgedAged Aged && & CommunityCommunity Community ServicesServices Services AustraliaAustralia Australia 和hé hé CatholicCatholic Catholic HealthHealth Health AustraliaAustralia Australia ）） ） 于yú yú 20162016 2016 年nián nián 委托wěi tuō wěi tuō 编制biān zhì biān zhì [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] 。。 。
The report analyzed changes to the Aged Care Funding Instrument (ACFI) announced in December 2015 and the May 2016 budget.
 报告bào gào bào gào 分析fēn xī fēn xī 了le le 20152015 2015 年nián nián 1212 12 月yuè yuè 和hé hé 20162016 2016 年nián nián 55 5 月yuè yuè 预算yù suàn yù suàn 中zhōng zhōng 宣布xuān bù xuān bù 的de de AgedAged Aged CareCare Care FundingFunding Funding InstrumentInstrument Instrument （（ （ ACFIACFI ACFI ）） ） 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 。。 。
These changes were projected to reduce ACFI funding by $2.5 billion over four years according to the sector's analysis - significantly higher than the government's estimate of $1.7 billion [1]. **However, this was not a direct budget cut but rather an "efficiency" measure** targeting the ACFI system.
 根据gēn jù gēn jù 行业háng yè háng yè 分析fēn xī fēn xī ，， ， 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 预计yù jì yù jì 在zài zài 四年sì nián sì nián 内nèi nèi 减少jiǎn shǎo jiǎn shǎo ACFIACFI ACFI 资金zī jīn zī jīn 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán —— — —— — 远高于yuǎn gāo yú yuǎn gāo yú 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 估计gū jì gū jì 的de de 1717 17 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] 。。 。
The government characterized these as "efficiencies" to address what it described as "gaming of the system" by some providers classifying residents in higher care categories to claim larger subsidies [2]. **Critically, total aged care funding actually increased during this period.** According to RMIT ABC Fact Check analysis of budget papers from 2009-10 to 2018-19, Commonwealth aged care spending (excluding pensions) increased by about $1 billion annually on average [2].
 ** * ** * 然而rán ér rán ér ，， ， 这zhè zhè 并非bìng fēi bìng fēi 直接zhí jiē zhí jiē 的de de 预算yù suàn yù suàn 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn ，， ， 而是ér shì ér shì 针对zhēn duì zhēn duì ACFIACFI ACFI 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng 的de de "" " 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ "" " 措施cuò shī cuò shī ** * ** * 。。 。
In 2016-17 specifically, total aged care spending increased by $1.1 billion in nominal terms compared to the previous year, despite the announced "efficiencies" [2]. **Real spending (adjusted for inflation) also rose steadily** - by $834 million (5%) in 2016-17 using CPI adjustment, and by $819 million (4.9%) using health price index adjustment [2]. **Regarding Meals On Wheels specifically:** There is no direct evidence that the ACFI changes specifically targeted Meals On Wheels programs.
 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 将jiāng jiāng 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 措施cuò shī cuò shī 描述miáo shù miáo shù 为wèi wèi 解决jiě jué jiě jué 部分bù fèn bù fèn 机构jī gòu jī gòu 通过tōng guò tōng guò 将jiāng jiāng 居民jū mín jū mín 归类guī lèi guī lèi 为wèi wèi 更gèng gèng 高gāo gāo 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 级别jí bié jí bié 以yǐ yǐ 获取huò qǔ huò qǔ 更gèng gèng 大补贴dà bǔ tiē dà bǔ tiē 而ér ér "" " 操纵cāo zòng cāo zòng 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng "" " 问题wèn tí wèn tí 的de de "" " 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 提升tí shēng tí shēng "" " [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。
The ACFI primarily relates to residential aged care facility funding, not community meal delivery services.
 ** * ** * 关键在于guān jiàn zài yú guān jiàn zài yú ，， ， 在此期间zài cǐ qī jiān zài cǐ qī jiān 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 总zǒng zǒng 资金zī jīn zī jīn 实际上shí jì shàng shí jì shàng 有所增加yǒu suǒ zēng jiā yǒu suǒ zēng jiā ** * ** * 。。 。
While community aged care providers may have faced broader budget pressures, the claim conflates residential care funding changes with specific community programs.
 根据gēn jù gēn jù RMITRMIT RMIT ABCABC ABC FactFact Fact CheckCheck Check 对duì duì 20092009 2009 -- - 1010 10 至zhì zhì 20182018 2018 -- - 1919 19 年度预算nián dù yù suàn nián dù yù suàn 文件wén jiàn wén jiàn 的de de 分析fēn xī fēn xī ，， ， 联邦lián bāng lián bāng 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 支出zhī chū zhī chū （（ （ 不bù bù 包括bāo kuò bāo kuò 养老金yǎng lǎo jīn yǎng lǎo jīn ）） ） 平均píng jūn píng jūn 每年měi nián měi nián 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā 约yuē yuē 1010 10 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。
具体jù tǐ jù tǐ 而言ér yán ér yán ，， ， 20162016 2016 -- - 1717 17 年度nián dù nián dù 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū 较jiào jiào 上年shàng nián shàng nián 名义míng yì míng yì 增长zēng zhǎng zēng zhǎng 1111 11 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán ，， ， 尽管jǐn guǎn jǐn guǎn 宣布xuān bù xuān bù 了le le "" " 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ "" " 措施cuò shī cuò shī [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。
** * ** * 实际shí jì shí jì 支出zhī chū zhī chū （（ （ 经jīng jīng 通胀tōng zhàng tōng zhàng 调整tiáo zhěng tiáo zhěng 后hòu hòu ）） ） 也yě yě 稳步wěn bù wěn bù 上升shàng shēng shàng shēng ** * ** * —— — —— — 使用shǐ yòng shǐ yòng CPICPI CPI 调整tiáo zhěng tiáo zhěng 后hòu hòu 20162016 2016 -- - 1717 17 年度nián dù nián dù 增长zēng zhǎng zēng zhǎng 8.348.34 8.34 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán （（ （ 5%5% 5% ）） ） ，， ， 使用shǐ yòng shǐ yòng 医疗yī liáo yī liáo 价格指数jià gé zhǐ shù jià gé zhǐ shù 调整tiáo zhěng tiáo zhěng 后hòu hòu 增长zēng zhǎng zēng zhǎng 8.198.19 8.19 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán （（ （ 4.9%4.9% 4.9% ）） ） [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。
** * ** * 关于guān yú guān yú 上门shàng mén shàng mén 送餐sòng cān sòng cān 服务fú wù fú wù （（ （ MealsMeals Meals OnOn On WheelsWheels Wheels ）） ） ** * ** * ：： ： 没有méi yǒu méi yǒu 直接zhí jiē zhí jiē 证据zhèng jù zhèng jù 表明biǎo míng biǎo míng ACFIACFI ACFI 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé specificallyspecifically specifically 针对zhēn duì zhēn duì 上门shàng mén shàng mén 送餐sòng cān sòng cān 项目xiàng mù xiàng mù 。。 。
ACFIACFI ACFI 主要zhǔ yào zhǔ yào 涉及shè jí shè jí 养老yǎng lǎo yǎng lǎo 机构jī gòu jī gòu 资金zī jīn zī jīn 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn ，， ， 而ér ér 非fēi fēi 社区shè qū shè qū 送餐sòng cān sòng cān 服务fú wù fú wù 。。 。
虽然suī rán suī rán 社区shè qū shè qū 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 机构jī gòu jī gòu 可能kě néng kě néng 面临miàn lín miàn lín 更gèng gèng 广泛guǎng fàn guǎng fàn 的de de 预算yù suàn yù suàn 压力yā lì yā lì ，， ， 但dàn dàn 该gāi gāi 说法shuō fǎ shuō fǎ 混淆hùn xiáo hùn xiáo 了le le 机构jī gòu jī gòu 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 资金zī jīn zī jīn 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 与yǔ yǔ 特定tè dìng tè dìng 社区shè qū shè qū 项目xiàng mù xiàng mù 。。 。

缺失背景

该gāi gāi 说法shuō fǎ shuō fǎ 遗漏yí lòu yí lòu 了le le 几个jǐ gè jǐ gè 关键guān jiàn guān jiàn 背景bèi jǐng bèi jǐng ：： ：
The claim omits several critical pieces of context: **1.
 ** * ** * 11 1 .. . 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 是shì shì 行业háng yè háng yè 预测yù cè yù cè 的de de 估算gū suàn gū suàn 值zhí zhí ，， ， 而ér ér 非政府fēi zhèng fǔ fēi zhèng fǔ 宣布xuān bù xuān bù 的de de 数字shù zì shù zì 。。 。
The $2.5 billion was a sector-projected estimate, not the government's announced figure.** The government announced $1.2 billion in ACFI "efficiencies" over four years in the 2016-17 budget, plus $472 million announced in December 2015.
 ** * ** * 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 在zài zài 20162016 2016 -- - 1717 17 年度预算nián dù yù suàn nián dù yù suàn 中zhōng zhōng 宣布xuān bù xuān bù 四年sì nián sì nián 内nèi nèi ACFIACFI ACFI "" " 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 提升tí shēng tí shēng "" " 1212 12 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán ，， ， 加上jiā shàng jiā shàng 20152015 2015 年nián nián 1212 12 月yuè yuè 宣布xuān bù xuān bù 的de de 4.724.72 4.72 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 。。 。
The $2.5 billion figure came from an industry-commissioned report that estimated the actual impact would be $840 million higher than government projections [1]. **2.
 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 数字shù zì shù zì 来自lái zì lái zì 一份yī fèn yī fèn 行业háng yè háng yè 委托wěi tuō wěi tuō 报告bào gào bào gào ，， ， 该gāi gāi 报告bào gào bào gào 估计gū jì gū jì 实际shí jì shí jì 影响yǐng xiǎng yǐng xiǎng 将jiāng jiāng 比bǐ bǐ 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 预测yù cè yù cè 高出gāo chū gāo chū 约yuē yuē 8.48.4 8.4 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] 。。 。
The changes were partly offset by other spending increases.** The 2016-17 budget included additional funding for regional aged care and information services that partially offset the ACFI efficiency measures [2]. **3.
 ** * ** * 22 2 .. . 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 部分bù fèn bù fèn 被bèi bèi 其他支出qí tā zhī chū qí tā zhī chū 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā 所suǒ suǒ 抵消dǐ xiāo dǐ xiāo 。。 。
The rationale for the changes.** The government implemented these measures in response to evidence of provider "gaming" of the ACFI classification system and an unexpected $2.5 billion blowout in ACFI costs within just six months following the 2015-16 MYEFO [2]. **4.
 ** * ** * 20162016 2016 -- - 1717 17 年度预算nián dù yù suàn nián dù yù suàn 包括bāo kuò bāo kuò 针对zhēn duì zhēn duì 偏远地区piān yuǎn dì qū piān yuǎn dì qū 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 和hé hé 信息xìn xī xìn xī 服务fú wù fú wù 的de de 新增xīn zēng xīn zēng 资金zī jīn zī jīn ，， ， 部分bù fèn bù fèn 抵消dǐ xiāo dǐ xiāo 了le le ACFIACFI ACFI 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。
Overall funding trajectory.** The claim presents a misleading picture by focusing on specific efficiency measures while ignoring that total aged care spending continued to rise significantly year-over-year in both nominal and real terms [2].
 ** * ** * 33 3 .. . 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 的de de 缘由yuán yóu yuán yóu 。。 。
** * ** * 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 实施shí shī shí shī 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 措施cuò shī cuò shī 是shì shì 为了wèi le wèi le 应对yìng duì yìng duì ACFIACFI ACFI 分类fēn lèi fēn lèi 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng 中zhōng zhōng 存在cún zài cún zài 机构jī gòu jī gòu "" " 操纵cāo zòng cāo zòng "" " 行为xíng wéi xíng wéi 的de de 证据zhèng jù zhèng jù ，， ， 以及yǐ jí yǐ jí 20152015 2015 -- - 1616 16 年度nián dù nián dù 中期zhōng qī zhōng qī 经济jīng jì jīng jì 和hé hé 财政cái zhèng cái zhèng 展望zhǎn wàng zhǎn wàng （（ （ MYEFOMYEFO MYEFO ）） ） 后hòu hòu 短短duǎn duǎn duǎn duǎn 六个月liù gè yuè liù gè yuè 内nèi nèi ACFIACFI ACFI 成本chéng běn chéng běn 出现chū xiàn chū xiàn 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 的de de 意外yì wài yì wài 超支chāo zhī chāo zhī [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。
** * ** * 44 4 .. . 整体zhěng tǐ zhěng tǐ 资金zī jīn zī jīn 趋势qū shì qū shì 。。 。
** * ** * 该gāi gāi 说法shuō fǎ shuō fǎ 通过tōng guò tōng guò 聚焦jù jiāo jù jiāo 特定tè dìng tè dìng 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī ，， ， 忽略hū lüè hū lüè 了le le 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū 在zài zài 名义míng yì míng yì 和hé hé 实际shí jì shí jì termsterms terms 上shàng shàng 持续chí xù chí xù 显著xiǎn zhù xiǎn zhù 逐年zhú nián zhú nián 增长zēng zhǎng zēng zhǎng 的de de 事实shì shí shì shí ，， ， 呈现chéng xiàn chéng xiàn 误导性wù dǎo xìng wù dǎo xìng 画面huà miàn huà miàn [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。

来源可信度评估

** * ** * TheThe The AustralianAustralian Australian （（ （ NewsNews News CorpCorp Corp AustraliaAustralia Australia ）） ） ：： ： ** * ** * 原始yuán shǐ yuán shǐ 来源lái yuán lái yuán 是shì shì NewsNews News CorpCorp Corp AustraliaAustralia Australia 拥有yōng yǒu yōng yǒu 的de de 主流zhǔ liú zhǔ liú 但dàn dàn 倾向qīng xiàng qīng xiàng 保守bǎo shǒu bǎo shǒu 的de de 报纸bào zhǐ bào zhǐ 。。 。
**The Australian (News Corp Australia):** The original source is a mainstream but conservative-leaning newspaper owned by News Corp Australia.
 虽然suī rán suī rán 其qí qí 在zài zài 事实shì shí shì shí 报道bào dào bào dào 方面fāng miàn fāng miàn 通常tōng cháng tōng cháng 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu 可信度kě xìn dù kě xìn dù ，， ， 但dàn dàn NewsNews News CorpCorp Corp 出版物chū bǎn wù chū bǎn wù 因yīn yīn 偏袒piān tǎn piān tǎn 保守政府bǎo shǒu zhèng fǔ bǎo shǒu zhèng fǔ 的de de 编辑biān jí biān jí 立场lì chǎng lì chǎng 而ér ér 受到shòu dào shòu dào 批评pī píng pī píng 。。 。
While generally reputable for factual reporting, News Corp publications have been criticized for editorial positions favoring conservative governments.
 该gāi gāi 文章wén zhāng wén zhāng 似乎sì hū sì hū 是shì shì 20142014 2014 年nián nián 直接zhí jiē zhí jiē 的de de 预算yù suàn yù suàn 报道bào dào bào dào ，， ， 但dàn dàn 读者dú zhě dú zhě 应yīng yīng 注意zhù yì zhù yì 其qí qí 所有权suǒ yǒu quán suǒ yǒu quán 背景bèi jǐng bèi jǐng [[ [ 33 3 ]] ] 。。 。
The article appears to be a straightforward budget reporting piece from 2014, but users should note the ownership context [3]. **Australian Ageing Agenda:** The source documenting the $2.5 billion figure is an industry publication serving the aged care sector.
 ** * ** * AustralianAustralian Australian AgeingAgeing Ageing AgendaAgenda Agenda ：： ： ** * ** * 记录jì lù jì lù 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 数字shù zì shù zì 的de de 来源lái yuán lái yuán 是shì shì 为wèi wèi 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 行业háng yè háng yè 服务fú wù fú wù 的de de 行业háng yè háng yè 出版物chū bǎn wù chū bǎn wù 。。 。
While it provides valuable sector-specific reporting, it reflects the perspectives of aged care providers who opposed the funding changes.
 虽然suī rán suī rán 它tā tā 提供tí gōng tí gōng 有yǒu yǒu 价值jià zhí jià zhí 的de de 行业háng yè háng yè 特定tè dìng tè dìng 报道bào dào bào dào ，， ， 但dàn dàn 它tā tā 反映fǎn yìng fǎn yìng 了le le 反对fǎn duì fǎn duì 资金zī jīn zī jīn 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 的de de 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 机构jī gòu jī gòu 的de de 观点guān diǎn guān diǎn 。。 。
The $2.5 billion figure came from a report commissioned by peak bodies with a vested interest in maximizing funding [1].
 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 数字shù zì shù zì 来自lái zì lái zì 一份yī fèn yī fèn 由yóu yóu 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu 最大化zuì dà huà zuì dà huà 资金zī jīn zī jīn 利益lì yì lì yì 诉求sù qiú sù qiú 的de de peakpeak peak bodiesbodies bodies 委托wěi tuō wěi tuō 编制biān zhì biān zhì 的de de 报告bào gào bào gào [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] 。。 。
⚖️

工党对比

** * ** * LaborLabor Labor 是否shì fǒu shì fǒu 也yě yě 曾céng céng 采取cǎi qǔ cǎi qǔ 类似lèi sì lèi sì 做法zuò fǎ zuò fǎ ？？ ？
**Did Labor do something similar?** Search conducted: "Labor government aged care efficiency dividends budget cuts" **Finding:** Labor governments also implemented efficiency measures and budget constraints in aged care.
 ** * ** *
The historical pattern shows both parties adjusting aged care funding mechanisms: - The 2012-13 Labor budget included efficiency dividends across government departments affecting aged care administration [2] - Labor governments faced similar budget pressures in health and aged care portfolios, though specific ACFI-equivalent cuts were not found - The broader pattern of governments seeking "efficiencies" in aged care funding is consistent across both parties **Comparative analysis:** The Coalition's approach of targeting ACFI classifications was a specific response to identified over-claiming issues.
 搜索sōu suǒ sōu suǒ 查询chá xún chá xún ：： ： "" " LaborLabor Labor 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 红利hóng lì hóng lì 预算yù suàn yù suàn 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn "" "
Labor's aged care record shows similar budget management pressures, though the specific mechanisms differed.
 ** * ** * 发现fā xiàn fā xiàn ** * ** * ：： ： LaborLabor Labor 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 也yě yě 在zài zài 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 领域lǐng yù lǐng yù 实施shí shī shí shī 了le le 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī 和hé hé 预算yù suàn yù suàn 约束yuē shù yuē shù 。。 。
Both governments faced the challenge of managing rapidly growing aged care costs driven by population ageing [2].
 历史lì shǐ lì shǐ 模式mó shì mó shì 显示xiǎn shì xiǎn shì 两党liǎng dǎng liǎng dǎng 都dōu dōu 在zài zài 调整tiáo zhěng tiáo zhěng 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 资金zī jīn zī jīn 机制jī zhì jī zhì ：： ：
-- - 20122012 2012 -- - 1313 13 年度nián dù nián dù LaborLabor Labor 预算yù suàn yù suàn 包括bāo kuò bāo kuò 影响yǐng xiǎng yǐng xiǎng 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 的de de 跨kuà kuà 政府部门zhèng fǔ bù mén zhèng fǔ bù mén 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 红利hóng lì hóng lì [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
-- - LaborLabor Labor 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 在zài zài 卫生wèi shēng wèi shēng 和hé hé 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 领域lǐng yù lǐng yù 也yě yě 面临miàn lín miàn lín 类似lèi sì lèi sì 的de de 预算yù suàn yù suàn 压力yā lì yā lì ，， ， 尽管jǐn guǎn jǐn guǎn 未wèi wèi 发现fā xiàn fā xiàn 具体jù tǐ jù tǐ 的de de ACFIACFI ACFI 等效děng xiào děng xiào 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn
-- - 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 寻求xún qiú xún qiú 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 资金zī jīn zī jīn "" " 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ "" " 的de de 广泛guǎng fàn guǎng fàn 模式mó shì mó shì 在zài zài 两党liǎng dǎng liǎng dǎng 中zhōng zhōng 保持一致bǎo chí yí zhì bǎo chí yí zhì
** * ** * 比较bǐ jiào bǐ jiào 分析fēn xī fēn xī ** * ** * ：： ： 联盟党lián méng dǎng lián méng dǎng 针对zhēn duì zhēn duì ACFIACFI ACFI 分类fēn lèi fēn lèi 的de de 做法zuò fǎ zuò fǎ 是shì shì 对duì duì 已yǐ yǐ 识别shí bié shí bié 的de de 过度guò dù guò dù 申报shēn bào shēn bào 问题wèn tí wèn tí 的de de 具体jù tǐ jù tǐ 回应huí yìng huí yìng 。。 。
LaborLabor Labor 的de de 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 记录jì lù jì lù 显示xiǎn shì xiǎn shì 类似lèi sì lèi sì 的de de 预算yù suàn yù suàn 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 压力yā lì yā lì ，， ， 尽管jǐn guǎn jǐn guǎn 具体jù tǐ jù tǐ 机制jī zhì jī zhì 不同bù tóng bù tóng 。。 。
两党liǎng dǎng liǎng dǎng 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 都dōu dōu 面临miàn lín miàn lín 着zhe zhe 由yóu yóu 人口老龄化rén kǒu lǎo líng huà rén kǒu lǎo líng huà 驱动qū dòng qū dòng 的de de 快速增长kuài sù zēng zhǎng kuài sù zēng zhǎng 的de de 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 成本chéng běn chéng běn 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 挑战tiǎo zhàn tiǎo zhàn [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。
🌐

平衡视角

** * ** * 完整wán zhěng wán zhěng 的de de 故事gù shì gù shì 既jì jì 包括bāo kuò bāo kuò 合理hé lǐ hé lǐ 的de de 担忧dān yōu dān yōu ，， ， 也yě yě 包括bāo kuò bāo kuò 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 的de de 理由lǐ yóu lǐ yóu ：： ： ** * ** *
**The full story involves both legitimate concerns and government rationale:** **Sector concerns were substantial.** Aged care providers, particularly not-for-profits caring for highly vulnerable residents, warned that the ACFI changes would reduce funding per resident by an average of $6,655 (11%) [1].
 ** * ** * 行业háng yè háng yè 的de de 担忧dān yōu dān yōu 是shì shì 重大zhòng dà zhòng dà 的de de 。。 。
Peak bodies described the impact as "devastating" and warned providers might need to reduce services or turn away complex-care residents [1]. **However, the government had legitimate reasons for the changes.** The ACFI system was experiencing unexpected cost blowouts, with expenditure increasing by $2.5 billion over forward estimates in just six months [2].
 ** * ** * 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 机构jī gòu jī gòu ，， ， 特别tè bié tè bié 是shì shì 照顾zhào gù zhào gù 高度gāo dù gāo dù 脆弱cuì ruò cuì ruò 居民jū mín jū mín 的de de 非营利fēi yíng lì fēi yíng lì 机构jī gòu jī gòu ，， ， 警告jǐng gào jǐng gào 称chēng chēng ACFIACFI ACFI 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 将jiāng jiāng 使shǐ shǐ 每位měi wèi měi wèi 居民jū mín jū mín 平均píng jūn píng jūn 减少jiǎn shǎo jiǎn shǎo 66 6 ,, , 655655 655 澳元ào yuán ào yuán （（ （ 11%11% 11% ）） ） 的de de 资金zī jīn zī jīn [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] 。。 。
There was documented evidence of some providers "gaming the system" by classifying residents into higher care categories without justification [2].
 PeakPeak Peak bodiesbodies bodies 将jiāng jiāng 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 影响yǐng xiǎng yǐng xiǎng 描述miáo shù miáo shù 为wèi wèi "" " 毁灭性huǐ miè xìng huǐ miè xìng 的de de "" " ，， ， 并bìng bìng 警告jǐng gào jǐng gào 机构jī gòu jī gòu 可能kě néng kě néng 需要xū yào xū yào 减少jiǎn shǎo jiǎn shǎo 服务fú wù fú wù 或huò huò 拒绝jù jué jù jué 接收jiē shōu jiē shōu 复杂fù zá fù zá 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 需求xū qiú xū qiú 的de de 居民jū mín jū mín [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] 。。 。
The government characterized the measures as better targeting rather than cuts, with spending still rising overall [2]. **This is not unique to the Coalition.** Both Labor and Coalition governments have grappled with aged care cost sustainability.
 ** * ** * 然而rán ér rán ér ，， ， 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 的de de 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 有yǒu yǒu 合理hé lǐ hé lǐ 理由lǐ yóu lǐ yóu 。。 。
The demographic pressures - more over-85s and over-90s requiring care - create inevitable funding pressures regardless of government [2].
 ** * ** * ACFIACFI ACFI 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng 正zhèng zhèng 经历jīng lì jīng lì 意外yì wài yì wài 的de de 成本chéng běn chéng běn 超支chāo zhī chāo zhī ，， ， 在zài zài 短短duǎn duǎn duǎn duǎn 六个月liù gè yuè liù gè yuè 内nèi nèi 远期yuǎn qī yuǎn qī 估计gū jì gū jì 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。
The question is not whether to manage costs, but how. **Key context:** The $2.5 billion figure, while cited from a legitimate industry report, represents the sector's projection of impact rather than a government-announced cut.
 有yǒu yǒu 文件wén jiàn wén jiàn 记录jì lù jì lù 显示xiǎn shì xiǎn shì 部分bù fèn bù fèn 机构jī gòu jī gòu 在zài zài 没有méi yǒu méi yǒu 正当理由zhèng dāng lǐ yóu zhèng dāng lǐ yóu 的de de 情况qíng kuàng qíng kuàng 下xià xià 通过tōng guò tōng guò 将jiāng jiāng 居民jū mín jū mín 归类guī lèi guī lèi 为wèi wèi 更gèng gèng 高gāo gāo 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 类别lèi bié lèi bié 来lái lái "" " 操纵cāo zòng cāo zòng 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng "" " [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。
Actual total aged care spending increased year-over-year during this period.
 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 将jiāng jiāng 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 措施cuò shī cuò shī 描述miáo shù miáo shù 为wèi wèi 更好gèng hǎo gèng hǎo 的de de 针对性zhēn duì xìng zhēn duì xìng 投入tóu rù tóu rù 而ér ér 非fēi fēi 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn ，， ， 整体zhěng tǐ zhěng tǐ 支出zhī chū zhī chū 仍réng réng 在zài zài 增长zēng zhǎng zēng zhǎng [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。
The claim conflates specific ACFI efficiency measures (primarily affecting residential care classification funding) with broader "aged care programs" and specifically mentions Meals On Wheels, which is not directly tied to ACFI funding mechanisms.
 ** * ** * 这zhè zhè 并非bìng fēi bìng fēi 联盟党lián méng dǎng lián méng dǎng 独有dú yǒu dú yǒu 。。 。
** * ** * LaborLabor Labor 和hé hé 联盟党lián méng dǎng lián méng dǎng 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 都dōu dōu 在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 成本chéng běn chéng běn 的de de 可持续性kě chí xù xìng kě chí xù xìng 问题wèn tí wèn tí 。。 。
人口rén kǒu rén kǒu 结构jié gòu jié gòu 压力yā lì yā lì —— — —— — 更gèng gèng 多duō duō 8585 85 岁suì suì 以上yǐ shàng yǐ shàng 和hé hé 9090 90 岁suì suì 以上yǐ shàng yǐ shàng 需要xū yào xū yào 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 的de de 人群rén qún rén qún —— — —— — 无论wú lùn wú lùn 哪个nǎ ge nǎ ge 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 执政zhí zhèng zhí zhèng 都dōu dōu 会huì huì 产生chǎn shēng chǎn shēng 不可避免bù kě bì miǎn bù kě bì miǎn 的de de 资金zī jīn zī jīn 压力yā lì yā lì [[ [ 22 2 ]] ] 。。 。
问题wèn tí wèn tí 不bù bù 在于zài yú zài yú 是否shì fǒu shì fǒu 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 成本chéng běn chéng běn ，， ， 而ér ér 在于zài yú zài yú 如何rú hé rú hé 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 。。 。
** * ** * 关键guān jiàn guān jiàn 背景bèi jǐng bèi jǐng ：： ： ** * ** * 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 数字shù zì shù zì 虽然suī rán suī rán 引yǐn yǐn 自zì zì 合法hé fǎ hé fǎ 的de de 行业háng yè háng yè 报告bào gào bào gào ，， ， 但dàn dàn 代表dài biǎo dài biǎo 的de de 是shì shì 行业háng yè háng yè 对duì duì 影响yǐng xiǎng yǐng xiǎng 的de de 预测yù cè yù cè ，， ， 而ér ér 非政府fēi zhèng fǔ fēi zhèng fǔ 宣布xuān bù xuān bù 的de de 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn 。。 。
该gāi gāi 时期shí qī shí qī 实际shí jì shí jì 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 总支出zǒng zhī chū zǒng zhī chū 逐年zhú nián zhú nián 增长zēng zhǎng zēng zhǎng 。。 。
该gāi gāi 说法shuō fǎ shuō fǎ 混淆hùn xiáo hùn xiáo 了le le 特定tè dìng tè dìng 的de de ACFIACFI ACFI 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 措施cuò shī cuò shī （（ （ 主要zhǔ yào zhǔ yào 影响yǐng xiǎng yǐng xiǎng 机构jī gòu jī gòu 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 分类fēn lèi fēn lèi 资金zī jīn zī jīn ）） ） 与yǔ yǔ 更gèng gèng 广泛guǎng fàn guǎng fàn 的de de "" " 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 项目xiàng mù xiàng mù "" " ，， ， 并bìng bìng specificallyspecifically specifically 提到tí dào tí dào 上门shàng mén shàng mén 送餐sòng cān sòng cān 服务fú wù fú wù ，， ， 而ér ér 后者hòu zhě hòu zhě 与yǔ yǔ ACFIACFI ACFI 资金zī jīn zī jīn 机制jī zhì jī zhì 并bìng bìng 无wú wú 直接zhí jiē zhí jiē 关联guān lián guān lián 。。 。

具有误导性

4.0

/ 10

该gāi gāi 说法shuō fǎ shuō fǎ 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu 误导性wù dǎo xìng wù dǎo xìng ，， ， 原因yuán yīn yuán yīn 如下rú xià rú xià ：： ： 首先shǒu xiān shǒu xiān ，， ， 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán 数字shù zì shù zì 是shì shì 行业háng yè háng yè 对duì duì ACFIACFI ACFI 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 的de de 预测yù cè yù cè 估算gū suàn gū suàn ，， ， 而ér ér 非政府fēi zhèng fǔ fēi zhèng fǔ 宣布xuān bù xuān bù 的de de 数字shù zì shù zì 。。 。
The claim is misleading for several reasons: First, the $2.5 billion figure was a sector-projected estimate of ACFI changes, not the government's announced figure.
 其次qí cì qí cì ，， ， 在此期间zài cǐ qī jiān zài cǐ qī jiān 老年lǎo nián lǎo nián 护理hù lǐ hù lǐ 总zǒng zǒng 资金zī jīn zī jīn 实际上shí jì shàng shí jì shàng 有所增加yǒu suǒ zēng jiā yǒu suǒ zēng jiā —— — —— — 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē "" " 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ "" " 措施cuò shī cuò shī 是shì shì 对duì duì 特定tè dìng tè dìng 资金zī jīn zī jīn 工具gōng jù gōng jù 的de de 调整tiáo zhěng tiáo zhěng ，， ， 而ér ér 非fēi fēi 整体zhěng tǐ zhěng tǐ 项目xiàng mù xiàng mù 预算yù suàn yù suàn 的de de 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn 。。 。
Second, total aged care funding actually increased during this period - the "efficiency" measures were adjustments to a specific funding instrument, not cuts to overall program budgets.
 第三dì sān dì sān ，， ， 该gāi gāi 说法shuō fǎ shuō fǎ 错误cuò wù cuò wù 地dì dì 将jiāng jiāng 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 与yǔ yǔ 上门shàng mén shàng mén 送餐sòng cān sòng cān 服务fú wù fú wù （（ （ MealsMeals Meals OnOn On WheelsWheels Wheels ）） ） 联系lián xì lián xì 起来qǐ lái qǐ lái ，， ， 而ér ér ACFIACFI ACFI 主要zhǔ yào zhǔ yào 涉及shè jí shè jí 养老yǎng lǎo yǎng lǎo 机构jī gòu jī gòu 资金zī jīn zī jīn 拨款bō kuǎn bō kuǎn 分类fēn lèi fēn lèi 。。 。
Third, the claim incorrectly associates these changes with Meals On Wheels, when ACFI primarily concerns residential aged care facility funding classifications.
 最后zuì hòu zuì hòu ，， ， 该gāi gāi 说法shuō fǎ shuō fǎ 忽略hū lüè hū lüè 了le le 实际shí jì shí jì 支出zhī chū zhī chū 持续chí xù chí xù 以yǐ yǐ 实际shí jì shí jì 价值jià zhí jià zhí 增长zēng zhǎng zēng zhǎng ，， ， 以及yǐ jí yǐ jí 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 部分bù fèn bù fèn 是shì shì 对duì duì 有据可查yǒu jù kě chá yǒu jù kě chá 的de de 过度guò dù guò dù 申报shēn bào shēn bào 问题wèn tí wèn tí 的de de 回应huí yìng huí yìng 。。 。
Finally, the claim ignores that spending continued to rise in real terms and that the changes were partly a response to documented over-claiming issues.
 尽管jǐn guǎn jǐn guǎn 行业háng yè háng yè 对duì duì 影响yǐng xiǎng yǐng xiǎng 的de de 担忧dān yōu dān yōu 是shì shì 合理hé lǐ hé lǐ 的de de ，， ， 但dàn dàn 将jiāng jiāng 其qí qí 描述miáo shù miáo shù 为wèi wèi "" " 削减xuē jiǎn xuē jiǎn 2525 25 亿澳元yì ào yuán yì ào yuán "" " 歪曲wāi qū wāi qū 了le le 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 的de de 规模guī mó guī mó 和hé hé 性质xìng zhì xìng zhì 。。 。
While there were legitimate sector concerns about the impact, presenting this as a "$2.5 billion cut" misrepresents both the scale and nature of the changes.

📚 来源与引用 (5)

  1. 1
    'Devastating' impact: budget cuts will reduce aged care funding by $2.5 billion

    'Devastating' impact: budget cuts will reduce aged care funding by $2.5 billion

    The Commonwealth's controversial changes to aged care funding will cost the sector in excess of $2.5 billion over the next four years, almost $840 million more than the government has estimated, a major new analysis shows.

    Australian Ageing Agenda
  2. 2
    Fact check: Did the government cut $1.2 billion from aged care funding?

    Fact check: Did the government cut $1.2 billion from aged care funding?

    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
  3. 3
    Budget 2014: Entitlements for older Australians cut in Hockey budget

    Budget 2014: Entitlements for older Australians cut in Hockey budget

    The Government will eliminate or cut a range of entitlements for older Australians, in what Treasurer Joe Hockey says is an attempt to make pensions "affordable and sustainable for decades to come".

    Abc Net
  4. 4
    FactCheck: is the Coalition spending '$1 billion extra' every year on aged care?

    FactCheck: is the Coalition spending '$1 billion extra' every year on aged care?

    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
  5. 5
    PDF

    Ansell Strategic Report on ACFI Review

    Unitingcare Org • PDF Document
    Original link no longer available

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。

Previous: C0713 Next: C0715