This government is running out of steam. For some government departments and minister, it has been a frenetic first two years in government. Michael Gove, Eric Pickles, Andrew Lansley and Iain Duncan Smith have been energetic in putting forward reform – some has worked, some hasn’t; some I agree with, a lot I don’t.
But what comes next? Of course, the new Queen’s speech due on 9 May could contain a vibrant new programme, but somehow I doubt it. Given the briefing before the budget, I don’t believe that this government would have resisted a drip-feed of the good stuff from the Queen’s speech by now – if there was any. On the contrary, as I wrote last week, the Lords reform bill which was supposed to be the centrepiece of the next session’s programme is running into trouble all round.
And there are suggestions that the long-awaited white paper on social care will not rise to the challenge of an older population, new expectations for care and an unsustainable funding system. Political headlines may be full of rows over Lords reform, Jeremy Hunt in big trouble, Theresa May unable to tell what day of the week it is, but the real failure of this government would be to put issues like social care reform on the ‘too difficult’ pile.
As a constituency MP, I organised a lot of consultation events on a whole range of issue. The one which gained by far the biggest response was a series of meetings to talk about the future of care. People were both genuinely interested – and genuinely worried. They fretted about how their parents would cope now and how they’d cope in the future; why the hospital didn’t seem to talk to the local authority about their mum’s care when she came home from hospital; how they could judge the quality of a care home; why they couldn’t stay at home for longer with a bit of practical support or the clever use of technology. And most of all, they worried about how and whether they would be able to afford the sort of care they wanted for themselves and their families.
Labour proposed a National Care Service while still in office, but it was too close to the general election to build consensus for long-term funding options. The coalition government set up the Dilnot commission which proposed a cap on lifetime care costs and raising the assets threshold above which people cannot receive any support with care. Labour supported the proposals and has taken part in cross-party talks to determine the long-term financial settlement.
However, this week council leaders from all parties have written an open letter calling for a substantive programme of reform in the white paper. Social care takes up 40 per cent of local government spending – without a long-term solution, the impact of maintaining even current levels of care will mean discretionary spending on leisure, libraries and more will be cut to the bone. And today we learn that delayed discharges – people trapped in hospital because there’s no suitable care for them to leave – has increased by 29 per cent in the last two years and 10 per cent in the last month.
The ball is in the government’s court. Labour is taking a long-term and politically mature approach to finding a solution. The other two parties are in the government, for goodness’ sake. If they can’t produce a long-term social care white paper, we will know conclusively that the rot has set in and omnishambles has turned to policy paralysis.
—————————————————————————————
Jacqui Smith is former home secretary and writes the Monday Politics column for Progress
—————————————————————————————
I doubt we’ll ever solve the long-term care issue while we continue to regard home ownership as an inheritance for the next generation rather than an investment for old age. It might be toxic politics now but people have to get real about assets and beneficiaries.
Jacqui Smith is right to (a) back efforts to get an all party agreement on care and (b) emphasise the importance throughout the country of the solutions the Dilnot Commission advanced. Dilnot may not be perfect (e.g. the particular blend of hybrid funding) but it is the only game in town now for those who do want a solution. The local authorities’ responses are only underlining that the present financing of adult social care is getting more and more untenable.
Dilnot reported in the Summer of last year. To their credit, the Lib Dems as a party backed Dilnot but the Government has seriously delayed its response. We can all guess that the blockage lies mostly in the Treasury with the extra cost of £1.7 billion per annum Dilnot estimated. Such expenditure may be seen as breaking the Government’s mantra of no alternative to austerity.
What happens with this White Paper and Dilnot is a prime campaigning issue for all parties and the wider society.
” nyer nyer nya nyer nyer ” (bloody television shows)