The prompt implementation of social care initiatives by the government is crucial. Many are feeling let down by the lack of progress on Labour’s pledge for substantial reforms during their initial months in power. While assisted dying and palliative care focus on the conclu ining months of life, social care caters to more ongoing, sometimes lifelong, needs. After the recent vote on Kim Leadbeater’s proposal, it’s high time that social care reform advocates take charge again.
Addressing the increasing demand for social care in an ageing society is acknowledged as one of the UK’s major policy challenges. Though the matter is devolved, all four administrations face similar hurdles. Despite this awareness, policies have persistently been postponed. Considering a royal commission could provide a new pathway to advance, and unless Wes Streeting has another plan, this might be a viable option.
On a positive note, discussions around social care workforce’s pay and conditions have commenced. This is crucial since staffing remains a core challenge in the sector. However, the upswing in the minimum wage alongside increased national insurance contributions from October’s budget is projected to cost employers up to £2.8 billion, overshadowing the £600 million funding increase promised by Rachel Reeves.
Labour’s emphasis on achieving cross-party consensus in their manifesto was a smart move. The last fifteen years have shown just how tough it is for ministers to navigate these waters alone. Caps on personal care fees incur significant costs, and both Labour and Tory’s new payment mechanisms have been met with criticism. In 2017, Theresa May’s proposed scheme during her general election bid was dubbed a “dementia tax,” which was a factor in losing the party’s majority in the Commons.
Earlier this year, economist Sir Andrew Dilnot, who spearheaded a government-sanctioned commission in 2011, called out both major parties for their “irresponsible” sidestepping of the issue. Challenges like increased demand and workforce difficulties burden councils and providers, with means-testing gaps and NHS impacts, such as delayed hospital discharges, adding to the mix. Although distinct, these issues are interconnected. A comprehensive policy should address each, albeit through successive phases.
Following The Guardian’s investigation, a positive development has been the review of carer’s allowance by ministers, which included increasing the earning limit for carers. This scenario highlights that while social care is a public service, it extends beyond that, encompassing family dynamics and the interplay between councils, individuals, and care providers.
A royal commission, or a similar body with the task of crafting a policy, must strive for consensus on funding, entitlement levels, and workforce strategy. The conversation should include both taxes and charges. Drawing parallels with health and private insurance, the fundamental principle should be risk-sharing. The aim is to avoid scenarios where unfortunate individuals—about one in ten seniors—face debilitating care expenses that deplete their life savings and erode inheritances.
