“Who wants to live forever?” That question was raised in the most soaring fashion by Freddie Mercury in the song with the same title. It was given extra poignancy when Mercury’s Aids diagnosis became widespread public knowledge. Another track, The Show Must Go On, performed by Mercury towards the end of his life is even more moving.
Songs can generate strange tangents in the minds of people and both made me think of social care. The issue is one the public and politicians have dodged for decades but any ignorance on the matter was brutally exposed by Covid-19. The chronic lack of funding and consistent avoidance laid the foundation for a catastrophe.
LISTEN TO THE PODCAST HERE:
The government was heavily criticised for the tragic turn of events and Boris Johnson was especially vulnerable here. It was on the doorstep of Number 10 that he pledged to “fix the crisis in social care once and for all”. These words certainly came back to haunt him. Now the immediate firefight against the pandemic is over Johnson has got around to fulfilling his promise or so he claims.
In typical fashion the government started to brief the media at the end of August about its policy ideas. A backlash quickly followed. Newspapers carried reports about plans to increase the amount of national insurance contributions working age people pay.
That did not go down well with some Tory backbenchers who complained it would penalise younger and poorer workers. Others decried it as a stupid tax on jobs that would slow crucial economic growth when it was most needed. The politically aware warned about the optics of a government that broke a manifesto promise not to hike taxes. Who would believe its pledges at the next general election many opponents gloated? None of these points deterred Johnson who pressed on with more than a tweak of what was originally reported.
He unveiled the ‘Health and Social Care Levy’ of 1.25% on 7 September with the proviso it would be paid by workers of all ages. That was a clear nod to the critics as it covers earned income and those working past state pension age. A raft of figures accompanied the levy idea – set to start next April.
From October 2023, the government will introduce a new £86,000 cap on the amount anyone in England will need to spend on their personal care over their lifetime. From the same time, anyone in England with assets of less than £20,000 will not have to make any contribution for their care from their savings or the value of their home.
Johnson also announced a 1.25% dividend tax hike designed to spread the pain of the NI increase. AJ Bell estimated the move will raise £600m from investors, the self-employed and is likely to hit company directors more than retail investors.
The prime minister also temporarily broke the triple lock on the state pension due to public spending pressures. Rapid wage growth resulting from the end of the furlough scheme could have potentially increased state pensions by over 8% next year.
Many commentators pointed out defending such an increase in state pension incomes would have been a tricky message for the government.
That would have been especially difficult as it has just hiked national insurance rates for workers and for employers. Now the flat-rate and basic state pension will instead increase by the highest of inflation or 2.5%.
Johnson faced considerable support and criticism in parliament for these proposals that take a lot of time to digest. The government’s policy paper on social care is also worth reading.
I am ambivalent about Johnson’s proposals and I am not usually on the fence when it comes to him. To say I believe him to be an inadequate leader is classic British understatement. Never has a prime minister in my lifetime seemed so chaotic in his management style or just out of his depth. There is also the ethical objection I have towards his disregard for the truth. But just because someone frequently lies does not mean they are always wrong. As the cliché goes, a broken clock is right at least twice a day and there were some points I had to concede in Johnson’s address to parliament.
These were the segments of his speech that gave me pause: “You can’t fix the Covid backlogs without giving the NHS the money it needs. You can’t fix the NHS without fixing social care, you can’t fix social care without removing the fear of losing everything to pay for it, and you can’t fix health and social care without long-term reform. The plan I am setting out today will fix all of these problems together.”
Also: “But Mr Speaker, we cannot just put more money in. We need reform and change. We need to build back better from Covid.”
The point about money is worth noting according to Curamcare. It is an online platform for people needing care and for self-employed carers to find each other.
Its director Patrick Wallace says: “There is a way forward that means spending the money better by embracing technology that already exists. Tech has so far made barely any inroads into care in the home. When a local authority pays £17 an hour for a carer, just half of it reaches the carer. The rest is swallowed by care agency administrative costs. This is ripe for reform.”
Another final passage that gripped me was when Johnson said: “Governments have ducked this problem for decades. Parliament even voted to fix it… and so Mr Speaker there can be no more dither and delay.”
On these fundamental points it seems to me Johnson is right and for whatever flaws in the plan at least there is one now. His majority has given him the power to put something on the statute books that he duly did. Other attempts to do so like Theresa May’s infamous failure in 2017 arose out of political weakness. She lacked the large majority Johnson has and was not able to communicate her ideas as effectively. Her perfectly reasonable policy proposals collapsed in the caricature of the “dementia tax” even though it was no such a thing.
I have little respect for Johnson, but I do respect the truth and the bottom line is reform of social care at any time is not easy. It is even harder in the context of a global pandemic that has polarised society as much as Brexit. Any government that manages to get major legislation through on vote losing issues like social care deserves some kudos.
This is despite the grandiose claims that accompanied the presentation of Johnson’s social care plans. He said: “The highest earning 14 per cent will pay around half the revenues, no-one earning less than £9,568 will pay a penny, and the majority of small businesses will be protected, with 40 per cent of all businesses paying nothing at all.”
And he claimed the reforms would help strengthen the union via more money for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland through the levy.
Who knows if these will come to pass? All I know is I won’t live forever but I want to live better in old age. And the show will definitely be shorter if I end up destitute towards the end of life. The perfect cannot be the enemy of the good and we need to start somewhere. And rest assured: the problem of social care will outlive the premiership of Boris Johnson.
Comments