Government U-turn on Dilnot welcome

Care matters, and care costs.

The Independent, Daily Mail and Guardian among others all cover talk of a possible U-turn on care funding. If true, this is very big – and welcome – news. The papers suggest that proposals would closely mirror Andrew Dilnot’s recommendations.

Dilnot proposed a dramatic increase in the ‘asset threshold’ over which people would have to contribute to costs of residential care, and a ‘lifetime cap’ on costs. He suggested an asset threshold of £100k, and a lifetime cap of £35k. The beauty of the Dilnot proposals is that it allows this and future governments to debate and decide where those thresholds should be. The combination of threshold and cap is what would determine how progressive the reforms would be. Would rich or poor – or middle-income – older people benefit most?

The Dilnot proposals reflected a political pragmatism about appealing to a more affluent home-owning ‘grey vote’, as well as a more principled pragmatism about the need for:

• society to pool resources against the uncertain risk of ‘catastrophic care costs’ that we may all face. None of us knows whether we’ll need care, at what level or for how long.
• clarity about what the state and the individual will pay towards care costs – as it is this lack of clear information that creates distress, and stops us from planning and preparing.

Dilnot was also clear, as all of us engaged in the care and support sector have been, that social care needs more state funding, full stop. Importantly, the Dilnot proposals and recent social care white paper also cover care and support for disabled adults. The big focus, however, is inevitably about paying for care in old age. This is where the political and public debate will be.

I am delighted that – after far too long – this Government has caught up with the reality: care matters.

Care costs. It’s decision time.