“The real treatment for addiction is prevention,” said Franceinfo on Wednesday September 16 the professor emeritus of geriatric internal medicine and president of the strategic committee of the International Longevity Center, Françoise Forette.
The government proposes to create a fifth branch of Social Security to take care of the dependency of the oldest people, but it still wonders how to finance it. A report was submitted Tuesday, September 15 to the government proposing several avenues but the professor emeritus of geriatric internal medicine and president of the strategic committee of the International Longevity Center, Françoise Forette, estimates Wednesday September 16 on franceinfo that “It is illusory to say that we are going to create a fifth branch of Social Security without contribution”.
franceinfo: In his report, Laurent Vachey proposes to delete “tax and social niches” and create new “compulsory levies”. Will these measures create debate?
Françoise Forette: I think that everything that is proposed by Laurent Vachey is not popular and some measures seem to me to be quite dangerous. For example, lowering the ceiling of the tax credit for home help for people who are not dependent, but that is precisely what should not be done since to keep people independent, we must be able to help them home. So if people can no longer be helped at home, there is a risk of paying into dependency. The real treatment for addiction is prevention. Prevention is operational, but it’s relatively slow. But I believe it is illusory to say that we are going to create a fifth branch of Social Security without contributions. It must be a contribution exactly the same as the one we pay for health insurance, pensions, because that will ensure long-lasting funding that will not be precarious, made odds and ends or called into question each year.
What do you think this contribution should look like?
It has to be united, exactly like Health Insurance. We have wonderful health insurance. We have wonderful Social Security. If we create a fifth branch, it must be within the same system, but probably managed, not by the large social security fund where we often find the wandering hand of the State, but probably by a independent fund such as the National Solidarity Fund for Autonomy. The interest of a contribution is the demographic profile of dependency. Very few people in percentage are dependent, it is 8% of the population over 60 years. If we make everyone contribute as we contribute for Health Insurance, there would be 2.6% of beneficiaries for 100% of contributors, which means that the contributions would be very low, of the order of one euro per day, to modulate of course according to income. (…) If the entire population of contributory age contributes one euro per day, that brings about 16 billion euros to the community and the system will last until 2060. In 2060, we will probably have to imagine other systems but the medical condition of people in 2060 is likely to be very different from what it is now.
But can the government create a new contribution when it has assured the French that they will not pay additional tax?
It is a question of political courage. I fully understand the different governments. This membership fee has been studied for a long, long time. In 2011, in particular. Governments are afraid to announce an additional contribution. But I think the question should be put to the French. Do you agree or not to pay a contribution and are you sure that, if your addiction arises, it will be taken care of with quality care? If the French say no, too bad. It’s up to everyone to take responsibility. We must decide today. And the advantage of a contribution such as one can imagine, is that tomorrow people can be taken care of. There is not a great period when we say that it will be from 2024 that we can begin to see clearly. No, it’s tomorrow. I think it should be studied.