[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Social Care Costs : Government & LA News / Plans / Actions - Page 8 - Carers UK Forum

Social Care Costs : Government & LA News / Plans / Actions

Discuss news stories and political issues that affect carers.
83 posts
What is CARERS UK doing about this?!

I really would like to see our own organisation keeping us up to date on these issues, with a special thread on the forum. We really shouldn't have to rely on articles in The Guardian or snippets from elsewhere (Chris is doing a grand job keeping us informed)
Our own organisation should be keeping us informed on what is surely the No.1 topic for all of us. "Who is going to help me when I can't manage on my own any more?".
.... and PLEASE add on the outcome of the meeting on the Carers Strategy ... held over a year ago !!!

https://www.carersuk.org/forum/news-and ... 20strategy

All decisions taken will affect us ... Carers UK are mere bystanders.

The very last thing we want is to be presented with a fait accompli !!!

Whatever transpires , circulating ALL members for their views ... IN ADVANCE ... would be a token gesture ... as , at best , 1 in every 260 family carers will have an opportunity to express their views.

It's called ... democracy !
Oh dear , a politician being quoted as to future policy ?


https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... are-capped


Jeremy Hunt confirms individual costs for social care to be capped.

Health secretary tells social workers conference the current charging system is ‘far from fair.’


Any new system of funding social care will be capped, Jeremy Hunt has confirmed, in his first policy speech since he took responsibility for social care reform in January. He also pledged to find new ways to support councils struggling to meet the demands of a rapidly ageing population in the green paper on social care due this summer.

Addressing a conference of social workers, the health and social care secretary said: “The way that our current charging system operates is far from fair. This is particularly true for families faced with the randomness and unpredictability of care, and the punitive consequences that come from developing certain conditions over others.

“If you develop dementia and require long-term residential care you are likely to have to use a significant chunk of your savings and the equity in your home to pay for that care. But if you require long-term treatment for cancer you won’t find anything like the same cost.”

Asked directly if that meant there would be a cap on what any individual had to pay, he replied: “Yes.”

At the last election the Tory manifesto provoked fury after it proposed making people meet all the costs of care until they had assets of less than £100,000. After a weekend of angry criticism, particularly from Tory candidates, Theresa May announced there would be a cap on the amount anyone would have to pay from their personal assets.

Hunt and the Treasury are under pressure from councils struggling to raise the money to meet the bill for social care. Many poorer areas cannot raise enough from council tax even at the higher levels now permitted.

This month Sir Stephen Houghton, the leader of Barnsley council in South Yorkshire, said the postcode lottery was turning a historic economic divide into a serious social one. “If you happen to live in a poorer area you’re more likely to receive lower-quality care in old age or if you suffer from a long-term disability. People should be entitled to the same quality of service no matter where they live,” he said.

Hunt acknowledged “the daily pressure” faced by local authorities and said: “We need to recognise that with 1 million more over-75s in 10 years’ time they are going to need more money, and we are going to have to find a way of helping them to source it.”

He laid out seven principles that he said would be the basis for the green paper, including quality, personal control, workforce planning and the full integration of health and social care. But his remarks disappointed those who had hoped for a tax-funded system that would give social care parity with the NHS. He insisted the element of personal responsibility envisaged in the original National Assistance Act 70 years ago would stay.

The Local Government Association, which represents all local authorities, said appropriate funding had to be the “overriding priority” for the green paper. “Government should first make a downpayment on the green paper by injecting additional resources into the system to fund immediate funding pressures which are set to exceed £2bn by 2020,” it said.

The Association of Directors of Social Services echoed the call for a long-term, sustainable funding solution to make sure that social care goes from being “something we don’t like to think about needing to something that we actively plan for”.


Merely posted for anyone still having faith in today's excuse for politicians.

If anything in the above article points to a SERIOUS approach to social care , please correct me !
Chris From The Gulag wrote:
Wed Mar 21, 2018 10:39 am
Oh dear , a politician being quoted as to future policy ?


https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... are-capped


Jeremy Hunt confirms individual costs for social care to be capped.

Health secretary tells social workers conference the current charging system is ‘far from fair.’


Any new system of funding social care will be capped, Jeremy Hunt has confirmed, in his first policy speech since he took responsibility for social care reform in January. He also pledged to find new ways to support councils struggling to meet the demands of a rapidly ageing population in the green paper on social care due this summer.

Addressing a conference of social workers, the health and social care secretary said: “The way that our current charging system operates is far from fair. This is particularly true for families faced with the randomness and unpredictability of care, and the punitive consequences that come from developing certain conditions over others.

“If you develop dementia and require long-term residential care you are likely to have to use a significant chunk of your savings and the equity in your home to pay for that care. But if you require long-term treatment for cancer you won’t find anything like the same cost.”

Asked directly if that meant there would be a cap on what any individual had to pay, he replied: “Yes.”

At the last election the Tory manifesto provoked fury after it proposed making people meet all the costs of care until they had assets of less than £100,000. After a weekend of angry criticism, particularly from Tory candidates, Theresa May announced there would be a cap on the amount anyone would have to pay from their personal assets.

Hunt and the Treasury are under pressure from councils struggling to raise the money to meet the bill for social care. Many poorer areas cannot raise enough from council tax even at the higher levels now permitted.

This month Sir Stephen Houghton, the leader of Barnsley council in South Yorkshire, said the postcode lottery was turning a historic economic divide into a serious social one. “If you happen to live in a poorer area you’re more likely to receive lower-quality care in old age or if you suffer from a long-term disability. People should be entitled to the same quality of service no matter where they live,” he said.

Hunt acknowledged “the daily pressure” faced by local authorities and said: “We need to recognise that with 1 million more over-75s in 10 years’ time they are going to need more money, and we are going to have to find a way of helping them to source it.”

He laid out seven principles that he said would be the basis for the green paper, including quality, personal control, workforce planning and the full integration of health and social care. But his remarks disappointed those who had hoped for a tax-funded system that would give social care parity with the NHS. He insisted the element of personal responsibility envisaged in the original National Assistance Act 70 years ago would stay.

The Local Government Association, which represents all local authorities, said appropriate funding had to be the “overriding priority” for the green paper. “Government should first make a downpayment on the green paper by injecting additional resources into the system to fund immediate funding pressures which are set to exceed £2bn by 2020,” it said.

The Association of Directors of Social Services echoed the call for a long-term, sustainable funding solution to make sure that social care goes from being “something we don’t like to think about needing to something that we actively plan for”.


Merely posted for anyone still having faith in today's excuse for politicians.

If anything in the above article points to a SERIOUS approach to social care , please correct me !
If I remember rightly in 2015 The Conservatives promised a care cap of something like £75.000 and then as soon as they got in they moved the date it was going to start to 2020. I remember feeling very disappointed, as it was one of the election pledges.
I hope it's not going to be one of the situations where the goal posts are moved again and again.

I'd welcome a cap, as at least there a possibly of coming out with something after decades of carering.
Not really news but a logical deduction ... hey Watson ?


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... re-say-mps

May must consider tax rises to fund NHS and social care, say MPs.

Letter calls on prime minister to set up a year-long commission to look at how to raise money.


Theresa May is under mounting pressure to consider tax rises to fund Britain’s creaking health and social care system, as a group of high-powered MPs on Monday call for a new commission to recommend money-raising measures.

Among the signatories to a letter to the prime minister are 21 select committee chairs who are urging May to set up a year-long “parliamentary commission”, echoing the approach taken after the banking bailouts.

Sarah Wollaston, MP for Totnes and chair of the health and social care committee, said: “We call on the government to act with urgency and to take a whole system approach to the funding of the NHS, social care and public health. On behalf of all those who rely on services, we need to break down the political barriers and to agree a way forward.”

The letter says the commission – effectively a special select committee – could examine witnesses and make recommendations by Easter 2019.

Its 98 signatories warn that the NHS, public health and social care systems are “overstretched, poorly integrated and no longer able to keep pace with rising demand and the cost pressures of new drugs and technologies”.

“Without action, patients will experience a serious further decline in services and the blame for that will be laid squarely at the door of politicians,” they add.

As well as the select committee chairs – including Wollaston and Nicky Morgan – the letter has also been signed by former Treasury permanent secretary Nick Macpherson, and several former Conservative ministers including Nick Boles, Oliver Letwin and Anna Soubry.

Labour signatories include business committee chair Rachel Reeves, Anna Turley and Ruth Smeeth.

The government is already preparing a green paper on social care funding, expected to be published in the summer but the signatories say a broader approach is needed.

Wollaston said: “We believe this is the best way to examine what funding is needed both now and into the long term and to seek a consensus on the options for sharing the costs.”

May will be questioned about the proposal by the liaison committee of select committee chairs – which Wollaston heads – on Tuesday.

Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary, has made a series of public comments in recent weeks spelling out the case for increased funding for the NHS – even if that means higher taxes.

One option under consideration is an “NHS tax”, whose revenue would be earmarked for health.

Speaking on ITV’s Peston on Sunday, Hunt said it was time to scrap what he had described as a feast or famine approach to funding the NHS. He called reports from the weekend that £4bn would be made available to the NHS in July “premature” but reiterated the need to consider higher taxes to make more cash available.

“There’s no doubt that NHS staff right now are working unbelievably hard and they need to have some hope for the future,” he said. “But I think their real concern is this rather crazy way we have been funding the NHS over the last 20 years, which has really been feast or famine.”

Asked about where extra resources could come from, he said: “We are a taxpayer-funded system, so in the end if we are going to get more resources into the NHS and social care system, it will have to come through the tax system and also through growth in the economy.”

He underlined that he would like to see 10 year funding settlements for health, allowing longer-term planning, and upfront investment in technologies that could boost efficiency, such as new IT systems.

A growing number of Conservative backbenchers have been raising the issue of the underfunding of healthcare.

The foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, has been among those calling for an increase in NHS funding, raising it at cabinet level in a well-briefed intervention in January.

Labour’s shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth expressed scepticism about the idea of a parliamentary commission. “A government could decide to make the tough decisions to fully fund the NHS if it had the political will to do so,” he said.

“Gordon Brown more than trebled the NHS budget in cash terms when we had a Labour government. We didn’t need a parliamentary talking shop to come up with that.”

The chancellor, Philip Hammond, has made the funding available for the NHS pay deal struck last week with nurses, midwives and other staff partly from Treasury reserves. But in his spring statement, he stressed he had already injected more cash into the NHS and social care.

A comprehensive spending review, setting out plans across all departments three years ahead is due next summer, with the overall spending total likely to be announced in Hammond’s autumn budget.


One alternative would be to let the " Free market " rip ... taking us back to the 1930s , and even to the Victorian age for the inevitable poor houses ?

In line with this Government's traditional thinking ?

No ?

I glad we all agree even if our politicians don't !!!
Hi,

I've been doing some research on the price of care homes and thought it was relevant to the post. It's scary how much the price of care is rising and the constantly changing landscape of govt help, including pushing back a cap on care costs till at least 2020. There can be huge disparity between the level of care you are receiving compared to the cost of care you are paying, dependent on where you are in the country.

Wiltshire (on average) has the 2nd highest care home costs per week, but is rated in the bottom 5 of all 46 counties in terms of the level of service provided. Oxfordshire is the most expensive (across the board for the average cost of care homes, nursing homes and care provided) with the general cost of care, much higher in the South of England, compared to the North.

Most expensive care homes, fees per week
Oxfordshire £954
Wiltshire £879
Bristol £862
Surrey £859
Rutland £845

Least expensive care homes, fees per week
Lancashire £531
West Midlands £532
Merseyside £534
South Yorkshire £534
Lincolnshire £551

Best care homes (% of care homes rated good or outstanding)
Rutland 100%
Shropshire 94%
Cambridgeshire 93.5%
Berkshire 91.7%
Herefordshire 91.4%

Worst care homes (% of care homes rated good or outstanding)
Isle of Whight 64.9%
West Yorkshire 69.6%
Greater Manchester 70.8%
Staffordshire 74.1%
Wiltshire & Suffolk 75%

There is also an interactive map www.trustedcare.co.uk/care-map which combines the ratings of Nursing Homes, Care homes and Home Care Providers across the country to give you a collective view on your local care services, their current CQC ratings and associated league table position as well as the average cost. It makes for interesting reading.
A new " Buzzword " for you ... where would we all be without them ?

Where else other than .... The Daily Chuckle !

A DEATH TAX ... ?


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... sters.html


" Death tax " to fix England’s broken care system is backed by the elderly, Age UK tells ministers

Charity found many older people would be happy with compulsory 5% levy
Added more money was needed to end 'harrowing' cases of social care failings
One husband said he suffered breakdown from stress of caring alone for his wife


A ‘death tax’ would be a popular way to fix England’s broken care system, Age UK told ministers last night.

The charity said it had found many older people would be happy with a compulsory 5 per cent levy taken from their estates after they die.

They said more money was needed to end ‘harrowing’ cases of social care failings including rushed ‘tick-box’ visits by an ever-changing cast of home helps.

Age UK said many families are at ‘breaking point’, with one elderly wife forced to put signs round her husband’s care home room to remind staff to give him a drink.

One husband said he had suffered a breakdown as a result of the stress of caring alone for his wife, who was suffering from dementia. Other family carers were left feeling suicidal.

An elderly man fell and broke both his hips in a care home - but staff did not seek urgent medical attention.

One home help left a woman with advanced dementia naked on a sofa in such a bad condition that a neighbour had to call an ambulance to take her to hospital.

And town hall delays meant some dementia sufferers were left on their own at home, in one case setting fire to the kitchen and going without food.

The report said: ‘Older people weren’t receiving “person centred care”; indeed what they got was sometimes not “care” at all.’

Older people told the charity they believed ‘everyone should contribute in some way’ to pool the risk and ensure that the unlucky few are not left with catastrophic care bills, as at present.

Another idea supported by pensioners was an extra penny on National Insurance - a tax from which the over-65s are exempt.


The ideas came from focus groups organised by Age UK. The sessions were attended by senior Cabinet ministers including Theresa May, Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt and Communities Secretary Sajid Javid.

Mr Hunt is at present considering the future of social care, and Age UK is one of the key members of his advisory committee.

Any plan to compulsorily take money out of people’s estates would be controversial as it could be construed as a new version of the ‘death tax’ put forward by Labour in 2010.

It would reduce the amount children could take in inheritance, not long after the Tories increased the threshold at which people have to pay inheritance tax.

The Age UK report, ‘Why call it care when nobody cares?’ followed focus groups held with 127 older people in 13 areas across the country.

The groups came up with five principles for Mr Hunt’s forthcoming social care green paper, including that ‘the responsibility needs to be shared across society’.

The report said: ‘Everyone needs to pay into the system, not just care users and their families.

‘Older people felt they had paid into the system all their lives and the whole population should continue to do so. The system should be there for them when they need it and everyone has a responsibility to help fund it.

‘Ideas such as an extra 1p on National Insurance and 5 per cent off everyone’s estates following their death seemed popular - the common theme was that everyone should contribute in some way(s).’

The other principles included that the extra money raised must be ring-fenced for social care, and that in return for increased spending the services must improve.

‘Some participants with assets were keen on a “cap” of some kind, but even they did not generally feel this would be enough on its own to justify them paying more, without issues such as rushed home care visits and a lack of continuity in staffing also being addressed,’ the report said.

‘Many participants complained about rushed, “tick-box” home care visits from paid carers and a lack of continuity, so they never got the chance to build a relationship or even establish proper communication.

‘Older people weren’t receiving “person centred care”; indeed what they got was sometimes not “care” at all.

‘One participant had resorted to putting signs around her husband’s care home room to remind the staff to do basic things like leave him a drink within reach.’

Older people said they felt social care was very expensive and poor value for money - with the middle classes who get no state help feeling they were signing ‘an open cheque’.

‘One person explained how caring for his wife had led him to have a breakdown because he simply couldn’t cope 24/7,’ the report said.

‘Council delays in assessing older people were a particular bug-bear and we were told of older people with dementia locking themselves out, setting fire to their kitchens, or going days without food while waiting to be assessed.’


All very interesting BUT ... just one piece of the WHOLE jigsaw puzzle ?

FROM THE CRADLE TO THE GRAVE.

NHS / social care ... in essence , one system currently segregated through the intervention of numerous politicians over the decades.

Until such time when the two are recombined , under PUBLIC ownership , and funded through GENERAL taxation , all attempts to fix just one part will be doomed to failure.

Defence ... would any reader reader expected the army and navy to be governed differently , or funded throgh different schemes ?
The Welsh show the English what can be done ?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-43668877


Care savings limit in Wales is raised to £40,000.


People in Wales will only have to pay the full cost of their own residential care if they have assets of more than £40,000 as the limit has been raised.

Welsh ministers have increased the capital limit by £10,000, 12 months after it rose from £24,000 to £30,000.

Labour has pledged to make the limit £50,000 by the 2021 assembly election.

Ministers said up to 4,000 people currently pay the full costs of their care and about 450 benefitted from last year's increase.


The capital limit determines whether a person pays their entire care costs or whether they receive financial support towards the cost from their local authority.

Social Care Minister Huw Irranca-Davies said: "From today, the capital limit is rising from £30,000 to £40,000, thereby allowing residents to retain a further £10,000 of their hard earned savings and other capital to use as they wish.

"By the end of the current assembly, the limit will be raised to £50,000."

The capital threshold in England is £23,250.


Every little bits helps ?

No news on the reintegration of the NHS with social care.

Could the Welsh elect to do that independently of England ?
An interesting article from the former comrades at the Morning / Mourning Star :


https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/art ... %20service

NPC calls on the Labour to launch costed plan for national care service.


THE Labour Party needs to launch a fully costed plan for a new national care service, the National Pensioners Convention (NPC) said today.

NPC deputy general secretary Dot Gibson told those gathered at the TUC London, East and South East Pensioners’ Network annual seminar to demand “a care system free at the point of delivery to all those in need.”

But she added: “There’s no point in continually exposing the crisis in care and simply reporting examples of the effects of this on individuals and their families as well as care workers.

“We have to promote a policy and fight for it. We can’t go on saying that we need this and we need that. We have to have a policy to fight for.”

She said that means-testing social care meant that “between 30,000 and 40,000 family homes are lost every year to pay for a place in a nursing home.”

Ms Gibson said that this had also created “a two-tier system,” with local authorities “cutting back on what they pay for the care of those people who haven’t got those kind of sums” needed to fund their own care.

She called for “a national care service with free domiciliary and residential care for all existing users, the ones who pay for themselves, and it should be free.”

The campaigner also demanded “the provision of services for the 1.2 million older people who are currently excluded from the system, a modernisation programme for residential homes and the end of private provision. We want nationalisation of that whole system.”

In addition, Ms Gibson called for “improved terms and conditions and training of care staff and improved regulation and monitoring.”

She said the total cost would be “£12bn a year on top of what is already paid through local authorities and government.”

Pointing to similar systems in Germany and Sweden, Ms Gibson asked: “Is there any reason why we can't have this kind of system in this country?”

She said the NPC was “calling on the Labour Party to actually put forward a policy which is costed and is not afraid to say that the whole of society will pay for social care in the same way that we pay for the National Health Service.”

She added: “They weren't afraid in 1945 and ever since then we’ve had that National Health Service.”



No pun intended but ... the majority of the carer army applauding ... in unison ?

Words / ideas that echo through the very heart and soul of both CarerLand and CareeLand.
For a brief time , I thought this was an April Fools fake news article !!!


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 39076.html

Older workers face paying Jeremy Hunt’s 'care tax' to cover shortfall in funding.

The new plans will affect more than 1.3 million people and will raise more than £2bn.

Those working beyond the state pension age will have to start paying a new “care tax”, under plans being considered by the government.

Currently those who reach state pension age stop paying national insurance but the proposals, tabled by Jeremy Hunt, will levy a 12 per cent charge on nearly 1.3 million workers.

The new tax will raise about £2bn and is intended to help with the shortfall in funding.

The plans will be published next month as part of a green paper on care and support for the elderly and will also be backed in a report by the Intergenerational Commission which will be published on 8 May, according to The Times.

“If you have a 67-year-old working alongside a 57-year-old doing the same job for the same pay do we really say that the 67-year-old should take home more and have lower deductions?” Lord Willetts, the commission’s chairman, said.

The number of people working past the state pension age has increased year on year and the current figure stands at approximately 1.3 million.

The Intergenerational Commission will be warning against placing the burden of paying for social care on younger workers.

“The older millennials are now hitting their late thirties, still earning less than those born five and even 10 years earlier,” Lord Willets added.

“Pensioners are less likely to be poor than families of working age so it is only reasonable that when you look at healthcare provision that you look at a fair contribution from older people.”


Well , this proposal isn't a bottom of the barrell one , it's conceived on the back of a fag packet ... and a packet of 10 at that !!!

Illogical deductions ... many work beyond pension age because the state pension is not enough to live on !!!!!!

What's even worse is that no creible policies are being put forward from the other side of the House.

In essence , the whole House haven't grasped what is needed ... a redistribution of wealth on a scale unprecedended in the modern age !

I honestly fear for future generations !!!
83 posts