Care Act risks being eroded away to nothing

Posted on July 26th, by geoff in CT blog. 2 comments

By guest blogger Damian Utton

from Pozzoni Architecture

A key aspect of the Care Act 2014 and Conservative Party manifesto will be broken as the lifetime cap on an individual’s cost of care, which was expected to be set at £72k from April 2016, is deferred until 2020.

Struggling local authorities, lobbying via the Local Government Association, are cited as the trigger-point for the policy U-turn: it is estimated that £3bn will be saved by 2020 in the event of the cap deferring, including a £59m saving for the year 2016-17 alone.

Whilst few would disagree that social care is chronically underfunded, this decision will undoubtedly impact on older people and their families, who, with the ability to plan taken away from them, will further pressure the homecare services that this about-turn hopes to protect; not to mention the already overstretched NHS.

There is real evidence that a suitable care environment can reduce hospital admissions, thereby relieving the burden on the NHS. If this deferment is to save on public spending, will there be new funding elsewhere in the social care system to compensate?

The Government must act positively to address funding for the care system or we must face the risk that the positive proposals of the Care Act will slowly erode away to nothing.

  • The CT Blog is written in a personal capacity – comments and opinions expressed are not necessarily endorsed or supported by Caring Times.

2 responses to “Care Act risks being eroded away to nothing”

  1. Isn’t it a case of reality strikes yet again? Rising national debt and still in annual deficit! It’s a very long haul out of latter years socialist fantasy government. Yet, it was a Labour government that triggered rapid post WWII recovery, by prioritising business start-ups… simple as that. They even established the sensible rule that people later selling their business to retire were able to retain all sale proceeds tax-free as being their ‘pension’, as they would not have been able to pay into a pension as well as always invest in their business. A rule that Brown and Blair scrapped soon after 1997. Talk about misguided! Enlightened ‘Labour’ in 1945 but enterprise stifling, cheap-trick vote-buying ‘Labour’ ever since. UK has a very long way to go to get near to affordable care for all the frail aged.

  2. Bob Ferguson says:

    Wow, Stephen, why don’t you get off the fence and let us know where your political sympathies really lie! Your trash talk about “latter years socialist fantasy government” will raise a gale of hollow laughter with many Labour supporters – not least those lined up behind Jeremy Corbyn. “Socialist”, indeed! You appear to have swallowed undigested the Daily Mail/Torygraph headlines that blamed – and still blame – the Blair/Brown administrations for the global financial crash and much else beside. Imagine spending all that money rescuing the NHS and building new schools when they should heave been running a surplus. How could they? Incidentally, you haven’t forgotten, have you – the Tory press certainly has – that Osborne had already signed up to Labour’s spending plans.

    Now that I’ve got that off my chest, what on earth has any of this got to do with Jeremy Hunt’s underhand betrayal of our elderly folk?

Latest blog posts

The NHS and all that jazz

By Caring Times editor GEOFF HODGSON

Last week the National Health Service marked its 70th anniversary. The irony is that, when this all too human institution...

The bland leaving the bland?

By guest blogger JEF SMITH

The headline for an interview which Sir David Behan, the Care Quality Commission’s departing chief executive, gave to The Guardian...

IT comes to CQC

By guest blogger JOHN BURTON

This month, IT is coming to CQC in person. David Behan is leaving, and DB’s replacement is IT, Ian Trenholm...