By Simon Beckett, Chairman, Wellburn Care Homes
Having received the full Report on the Commission on Funding of Care and Support, I was particularly interested to hear the Commission Chairman Andrew Dilnot’s presentation at the ECCA Conference. I expected a rather dry and statistical presentation but it was quite the reverse.
The lasting impression was the ability to address people individually, rather than a conference, on a complex and extensive subject concisely, with considerable humour and energy. In particular, his passion for care and that meeting the care needs for the elderly properly was a proper measure of how humane British society really is.
Alongside this was number of worrying statistics i.e. those aged 85 and over will double in the next 20 years; unmet care needs are growing considerably annually (particularly the last 4 years) across all sectors of care and the current funding is unfair, unjust and inadequate. Dilnot commented that action is already well overdue. I remind everyone, that his report is the fifth/2009 Green Paper included, in 14 years, yet nothing material has been done to date.
There is a great need for everybody’s liability to be pooled and 24/7 care is the only sector of social care/NHS where it is not. Many older people, fear for their future care needs and yet have no means of quantifying it. In exceptional cases the cost can be as high as £250,000, or more. For most who have need of some care assistance, the average cost is £20,000. How can you plan properly, if you do not know the amount and timing, assuming you have the funds? Today, all we have is a bottom limit on which your funds have to be reduced to £23,250 before you get any help at all. The latter is grossly unfair, illogical, (and therefore counterproductive) and the cause of considerable concern for many. It also acts as a clear encouragement to cheat the system.
Conversely Dilnot proposed a ‘cap’ of £35,000 on resident net assets and thereafter, the State would pick up the tab. The £35,000 cap was questioned with people asking if it would be more acceptable, politically, if it was higher? This was answered clearly by Dilnot through a graph which illustrates it is fair overall, balanced on the average of most peoples’ net assets (home owners) and therefore, would achieve maximum participation. If it was fixed at £50,000, far fewer people would benefit. Personally, I suggest that the limit could be indexed say every 5 years – Y.E. 2015 may be reduced.
His conclusion was most impressive and reflected his confidence in the sector – ignore the few bad cases. People working in the sector should be admired, thanked, appreciated and valued for what they do and the quality of it. For those with experience of the Southern Cross debacle, or 70 other Administrations this year to date in this sector, this PR balance was a joy to hear. His passion to support, reward the industry and achieve agreement on a proposal that was fair, sustainable and resilient, which would form the basis of a long term settlement was uplifting and greatly appreciated by the audience. His final comment was that we were all too polite and reasonable. We need to get far more cross, so that the politicians realise they are at the end of the road and it is well beyond time for a resolution.
Care is preventative and could avoid/reduce many other problems currently resulting from the lack of and Dilnot’s proposal would only cost £1.7 billion, which currently represents only 1/8 of the current Social Care budget, and could easily be met by society as a whole. Plus, if operated professionally, considerable costs could be reduced in terms of hospital nursing beds, specialist costs etc. The joined up thinking Stephen Donell has been clamouring for, is still totally lacking in many localities.
Further, providing the care for clients’ families, and those who require it, would remove the considerable fear of the unknown and losing everything that haunts them in later life.
Further, the current system is thoroughly unfair, highly complex with no pathway, little independent advice and unsustainable, in the long term. The politicians are in the last chance saloon and need to take this Report on board now before disaster strikes for many older people and their families, due to the size of the unmet needs, which become totally unmanageable and people become really angry. The politicians must realise, that this is inevitable now if they continue to do nothing
