[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 FUNDING : GREEN Or RED HERRING PAPER ? Various Schemes And Utter Madness : All Together In This Thread - Page 17 - Carers UK Forum

Social Care FUNDING : GREEN Or RED HERRING PAPER ? Various Schemes And Utter Madness : All Together In This Thread

Share information, support and advice on all aspects of caring.
174 posts
Oh Chris, suppose we have to wait and see some more! I wouldn't mind having some stock in those one eyed companies

Happy new year to all! xxx
Yep ... a slightly less miserable year to all !

All bets are off if that Green Paper ever gets published this forthcoming year.
A WHOLE SACK FULL OF £ 1 COINS ... PERHAPS £ 2 COINS ... HAS FINALLY DROPPED !!!

Dr. DAN POULTER M.P. ... ALSO CHAIRPERSON OF THE ALL PARTY CARERS GROUP IN THE HOUSE.

" BEEN READING THIS THREAD, DAN ??? "




Johnson must satisfy new Tory voters by unifying NHS and social care systems.

The PM won the election by taking former Labour heartlands. Joined-up thinking on health and care would repay that trust.



Last month, Boris Johnson delivered for the Conservatives an election success driven by Brexit and by a promise of investment in our NHS and public services. Seats in the Midlands and the north that had always returned Labour MPs turned blue for the first time. As the serious job of government begins, the challenge now facing the prime minister is to ensure these first-time Tory voters continue to support the party in the future.

It is the one-nation Conservative tradition the government must now look to if it wants to maintain the support of voters in areas that were once Labour heartlands. These voters may have supported Johnson to “get Brexit done” but they have also been historically mistrustful of his party and feel left behind by the promises of a metropolitan political class that seems remote from the issues that affect their daily lives.

The end of austerity, and Johnson’s renewed focus on investment in transport and other big infrastructure improvements in the north of England, is a welcome start in connecting with some of these first-time Conservative voters. But there is more to do, and the government will also need to ensure that unintentional injustices that have emerged in the benefits system are properly addressed so that the safety net of the welfare state is more readily and immediately available to those who fall on hard times.

More than that, to build trust with its new voters, the government will need to show a sceptical public that it has a genuine and enduring commitment to our public services and to valuing those who work for them. It will need to show voters that it is on their side and understands their daily concerns, many of which centre around public services such as the NHS.

All this is not to say that the Conservative government should not seek value for money, efficiency savings and productivity gains where they can be found. But holding on to its new voters requires a fundamental recognition that the free market is sometimes the problem, not the answer, and that voters want and need a government to deliver for them through the arm of the benevolent state and properly funded public services.

The NHS and social care, in particular, must be central to the government’s domestic offer. The next five years will see the start of an ambitious hospital building programme and the biggest cash increase in the NHS’s history. This money is as badly needed by the NHS as it is welcome. But social care, which has been neglected for decades, must no longer be treated like the poor relation, and the government must make good on its promise to find political consensus to deliver a long-term and sustainable social care system.

The reality of an ageing population living with multiple long-term medical conditions means that for many patients it is increasingly difficult to understand where healthcare ends and social care begins. Yet the patient and their family are confronted by two differently funded systems, which often operate more in isolation than in harmony, and two (and sometimes more) different service commissioners. Health and care professionals waste increasing amounts of their time and effort working in a fragmented and inefficient system that desperately needs reform for the sake of patients and their families.

The only sensible way to genuinely transform health and care services is to pool budgets through a single health and social care commissioning model. But improved health and social care service delivery is not just about having a single budget and commissioner, it also requires fundamental reform of the social care funding model and, for Conservatives, this may mean thinking the previously unthinkable.

Pooling budgets into a single commissioning process would allow the government to make a big offer of a genuinely integrated and patient-centred health and care system, but the biggest part of that offer should be free social care at the point of need, with a big step change in public funding to make the system work: a unified NHS and social care service that is free at the point of need to all. It needs to be an offer of that size to find political consensus and send out a strong message that the government believes in our public services.

Dr Dan Poulter is the Conservative MP for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich and a practising NHS psychiatrist. He was a health minister under David Cameron



Not bad , Dan ... 8 out of 10 ... for recognizing the bleeding obvious ???

Another point IF you had acknowledged that WE are the bedrock of the social care system in this country.

There again , one would not expected the Chairperson of the All Party Carers Group in the House to know everything ???

Joined up thinking , Dan ?

Free social care ?

Low millions of family / kinship carers to be , technically , made redundant ?

Descending on their local job centres in search of ... jobs needing upto date skills ?

What chance of many not needing re-educating ... and that abhorrent 21 Hour Rule on studying ???

Huge spike in food bank usage IF UC remains as is ... wait for first payment , and a possible sub which cuts future payments until repaid.

How many will NOT qualify for ESA automatically ... forced down the " Income " route ?

Is that really what you mean by ... " Free social care " ... to be funded out of general taxation ???

You've done well so far , son ... don't let all 8.6 odd MILLION of us down ... not including the same number , at least , of carees !!!
A tad more.

Free social care ?

What's going to happen to all disability benefits / allowances.

Mainly DLA / PIP / Attendance Allowance ?

Some of those monies are used for non social care purposes !

And , come to think of it ... Carers Allowance ... ties in with us all being made redundant ?

Who would like to be a fly on the wall if ever this aspect were to be discussed at cabinet level ?

DWP questions could be very interesting ?

How else could they plan to do it and still deliver free social care ???

Spend £ BILLIONS ?

Flies in the face of decades of Tory thinking ... " Either sink or swim , don't expect us to bail you out ! "

Would they dare tinker with that £ 140 odd BILLION we save the taxpayers ???

I smell a rat ... and a political one at that !

I remain fully supportive of free social care ... under the one roof of the NHS ... and funded through general taxation.

Where would we all be without conundrums in Carerland ???
There was lots of discussions years ago, you taking part in those ones too Chris, suggesting that all disability benefits be handed over to local authorities. Like you said, for many it is about being independent and may not be needing care packages per se. We campaigned against it then, and will do so again should the issue be raised again.

x
Ah ... those halcyon days ?

Nowadays , I tend to plough a lone furrow ?

Probably even more important than 2009 - 2009 and ... where is everybody ?

Before long , all of us will be faced with our futures.

Opinions ?

Or do we let others determine our fate ?

Strange world ... we can vote for whosoever to represent us in the House but ... have no say on what will be our future ?

We did so , to an extent , last time round ... through CarerWatch but ... in 2020 ?

Nothing concrete as I type but ... this threads contains many hints as to the ball game we will all be playing.

Some articles may be sounding out ones ... testing the water so to speak.

Still ... let's all wait and see ... we tend to be very good at that ?

Professor Luke Clements ... what's his view ?

17 months ago , we recommended to CUK to invite guest speakers onto the forum for a Q & A session.

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


Still time !
They don't come much better than this one ... ?


It’ll cost Johnson £14 billion to keep his promises on social care. Will Javid pay up ?

Restoring care standards even to 2010 levels will blow a big hole in the chancellor’s budget in March.



Under the nose of parliament, right there in Westminster, Garside House Nursing Home run by Sanctuary Care Ltd has just been given an “overall inadequate” rating from the Care Quality Commission. It is judged not “safe”, “effective”, “responsive” or “well-led” and requires improvement for “caring” in its 40 beds for people with dementia, disabilities and for end-of-life care. It is now in special measures and under investigation by the police over allegations of abuse and mistreatment.

The everyday horrors of social care pass barely reported these days, cruelties behind net curtains or inside institutional “homes” stay largely hidden. Brexit will worsen an already severe staffing crisis, with more than 580,000 new recruits required by 2035 to keep up with our ageing population, on top of the current 122,000 vacancies.

Boris Johnson pledged in his first speech as prime minister: “We will fix the crisis in social care once and for all, and with a clear plan we have prepared to give every older person the dignity and security they deserve.” No plan exists. Instead the Queen’s speech promised only to try to reach a “cross-party agreement” in an unlikely bid to co-opt or blame the opposition for the Tories’ failure. He offers a £1bn emergency bung to keep the collapsing system afloat a little longer.

Until the budget in March, the true complexion of this government remains opaque. Promises, vague assurances and aspirations for the north will flood the press, but only hard cash on the table will tell us who they are and what they intend. Johnson likes infrastructure he can brand his own, so northern railways can expect eye-catching investment. But how far will his chancellor – an Ayn Rand devotee and believer in a small state – burst the party’s self-imposed limits for current spending? We already know their priorities will be the NHS, police and schools – but what of everything else that has been parched dry by austerity, where the IFS notes that 14% cuts are already “baked-in”?

Let’s put that £1bn pledged for social care into context.

Johnson promises people the “dignity and security they deserve and that no one who needs care has to sell their home to pay for it”. That’s two separate promises, with the second the most concrete and hardest to break. In 2014, following the Dilnot report, David Cameron’s government passed a law to fix this: the Care Act. The law fixed a £72,000 cap as the most anyone need spend on care before the state stepped in to pay the rest, so that those entering residential care would be less likely to have to sell their home to pay for it. But the £4bn cost was more than his chancellor George Osborne would tolerate: he postponed it to 2020, and then indefinitely.

There is no need for a new act to simply implement this – but it would cost £4bn.

Yet that only compensates the better off for what they currently pay themselves, without adding anything to the desperate inadequacies of the care provided. It would, however, right the random injustice of dementia sufferers losing their homes and savings while those lucky enough to drop dead pay nothing. It may be fiscally regressive to spend £4bn on compensating the haves rather than improving bad care for all, but applying the principle of the NHS to social care – taking everyone out of life’s unfair health lottery – feels fair to most people, shocked when they first encounter the social care payment system.


What of the other part of the Johnson promise, his pledge to give “dignity and security” in care so lacking from the Garside House Nursing Home? Anita Charlesworth, director of research and economics at the Health Foundation, says that to return social care to the same standard and spending per head as in 2010 would now cost another £10bn. It’s not as if care in 2010 was anything to boast about, but the deterioration since has been shocking.

Funding has dropped by £700m in real terms since 2010/11, resulting in 400,000 fewer people using the service than in 2010, at the beginning of the Tories’ first term. The threshold for qualifying for any care at all has risen so steeply that Age UK finds 1.4 million people are not receiving the care they need. Of these, 300,000 have “very substantial” needs. People are dying at home alone and uncared for, or are shipped into A&E at the last minute contributing to the NHS beds crisis – whose worst performance figures ever recorded are published today.

“Each year we delay, it gets worse,” says Charlesworth. She quotes a Competition and Markets Authority survey of the private care home sector: “The rates local authorities pay to care providers doesn’t provide enough for a quality service. Care homes used to cross-subsidise their state-funded patients with self-funders – but they can’t do that now. The result is the closure of nursing homes.”

Then there is the workforce crisis, which she says is due to low pay and poor conditions. A quarter of people in the social care sector are on zero-hours contracts – see Ken Loach’s latest gruelling exposé in Sorry We Missed You. The post-Brexit visa squeeze will do nothing to help the dire staffing situation: 40% of London care workers are from overseas.


This is the challenge for Boris Johnson’s first budget, which will reveal his true intent. Will he spend £14bn to rescue homeowners from forced sales and to restore social care at least to the bare standards of 2010? Garside House in special measures on his Westminster doorstep is only the latest warning.

• Polly Toynbee is a Guardian columnist
Carers UK responds to Prime Minister’s BBC Breakfast interview.

14 January 2020

In an interview on BBC Breakfast this morning (Tuesday 14th January 2020) the Prime Minister Boris Johnson committed to bringing forward a plan for social care reform this year and implementing it by the end of Parliament.

Responding to the Prime Minister’s comments on social care, Helen Walker, Chief Executive of Carers UK, said:

“With every day that passes, fewer older and disabled people are receiving the standard of care they need and family members are increasingly picking up the pieces. A clear and robust plan for social care reform, including long term investment, cannot come soon enough.

“With older and disabled people living for much longer than before, families cannot be expected to take on the huge amount of care required – which has staggering implications for their own finances and personal health in the long term. As it stands, more than 600 people quit their job every day to care for family members at a huge personal cost.

“To be effective the Government’s plan for social care must include practical and financial support for unpaid carers, the pillars of the system, so that they can continue to care without putting their own lives on hold.”



Just for the record ... a statement wherein nothing that's already been said ... over the past decade.

Perhaps Helen would like to expand a little ... under this thread ?

“To be effective the Government’s plan for social care must include practical and financial support for unpaid carers, the pillars of the system, so that they can continue to care without putting their own lives on hold.”


Just how do CUK see this been translated into reality ???
Boris Johnson admits solution to social care crisis could still be five years away,

Prime minister backtracks on pre-election claim to have ready-to-go rescue package – and warns action could take a full parliament to deliver.



Boris Johnson has admitted he does not have a worked-up plan to end the social care crisis and that a solution could be five years away.

In a BBC interview, the prime minister backtracked on his pre-election claim to have a ready-to-go rescue package – instead, saying he would be “bringing forward a proposal” later this year.

Asked for a date for action to finally be taken to improve social care, Mr Johnson said: “We will certainly do it in this parliament” – prompting the interviewer to point out: “That’s five years away.”


In July, on the steps of Downing Street, the new leader insisted he had a “clear plan we have prepared to give every older person the dignity and security they deserve”.

But the Conservative manifesto then ducked the controversy, as the Tories feared the threat of new taxes to fund a cap on costs would derail the campaign – as it did Theresa May’s in 2017.

In the interview, Mr Johnson acknowledged the NHS crisis could not be solved without “a revolution in the way we approach social care”.

He promised there would be “a plan this year” – but pledged only that his government would “get it done within this parliament”.

Put under pressure over the social care crisis, Mr Johnson said: “This is a big, big thing. I mean, this is a potentially massive change in the way we fund social care, and we’ve got to get it right.

“We have got to think very carefully about how we do it, because there are lots of quite important moral and social issues contained in it.

“You know, should taxpayers be paying for people who might be able to afford it? What is the relationship you want to encourage, should families be looking after their own, their elderly relatives (and) to what extent?

“All these are very complex questions. The key thing is that everybody must have safety and security in their old age, nobody should sell their home to pay for the cost of that care. We will do that.”



" You know, should taxpayers be paying for people who might be able to afford it ? "


Love it ... okay BoJo ... " If people can afford cancer treatment under the NHS , why should I have to pay for it ??? "
Theme from the Green Paper thread ... recombine those ugly twin sisters ... Our NHS and Social Care ???


Emergency dementia admissions to hospitals up 35% in five years.

NHS data for England shows reality of social care system, says Alzheimer’s Society.



The number of people with dementia being admitted to hospital as a medical emergency has risen by more than a third in five years, figures have shown, with a lack of social care blamed for the increase.

NHS data showed that hospitals in England recorded more than 379,000 admissions of people with the condition during 2017/18. That was 100,000 more than the number of such patients admitted in 2012/13 – a 35% jump in five years.

The Alzheimer’s Society, which obtained the figures, said they meant that more than half of everyone in England with dementia had been admitted to hospital at least once – and sometimes many times – during 2017/18.

“This is the stark reality of many people with dementia left to fall through the cracks in our broken social care system,” said Jeremy Hughes, the chief executive.

Falls, dehydration and infections are thought to be the commonest reasons for those with the condition ending up in hospital overnight. Hughes blamed the spike in admissions on social care – support for people at home or in care homes – being “scarce, inadequate and costly”.

The 100,000 extra admissions are costing the NHS £280m a year, the Alzheimer’s Society has calculated.

Figures it collated from the NHS’s hospital episodes statistics data collection system also showed that the number of people with dementia who spend at least a month in hospital topped 40,000 in 2017/18, at a cost of £165m.

“People with dementia are all too often being dumped in hospital and left there for long stays. Many are only admitted because there’s no social care support to keep them safe at home. They are commonly spending twice as long in hospital as needed, confused and scared,” added Hughes.

The charity said it knew of many cases where lack of social care prolonged a dementia patient’s time in hospital unnecessarily. They include a woman whose husband had to spend eight months of one year in hospital when he suffered multiple infections and falls, unable to return home, because no assessment was made about the level of care he would need once he was discharged.

“The system is not working and these figures reveal how it is letting down people with dementia and putting our hospitals under unnecessary and intolerable strain. The social care crisis is harming patient care,” said Niall Dickson, chief executive of the NHS Confederation.

“The NHS and social care are sister services – when one does not work, the other suffers.”

Deborah Alsina, chief executive of Independent Age, a charity that campaigns on issues affecting older people, said the rise in hospital admissions by dementia sufferers was “very worrying. It is unacceptable that people can end up waiting for up to a year in hospital owing to a lack of appropriate care and support.”

She backed the Alzheimer’s Society’s call for urgent and decisive action by the government to improve the crumbling social care system. Boris Johnson has pledged that a solution is among his key priorities.

Hughes urged Sajid Javid, the chancellor, to allocate £8bn for social care in his budget on 11 March and make personal social care free in England, as it already is in Scotland.
174 posts