Govt sets up commission to tackle care funding
Government is setting up a National Care Service Commission to establish a fair and sustainable way of funding its plans to offer social care, which will involve a compulsory levy.
Care Services minister Phil Hope has announced the Government is setting up a commission to advise ministers on the fairest and most sustainable way for people to receive free care under the National Care Service after it failed to reach a political consensus on funding.
A white paper published today says the commission, to be established at the start of the next parliament, will consider all the options for payment put forward by charities and the public as part of the Big Care Debate and the cross-party conference.
The paper does suggest that a compulsory levy will be introduced on everyone to fund care services as part of Government plans.
Hope says: “Everyone will pay into it in a fair way and in return everyone will then have peace of mind that their savings and homes will be protected from high care costs. The whole of society will benefit and the National Care Service will support individuals and families for generations to come.
“We must find a fair way of funding the National Care Service. The stakes are very high. That’s why we must have a clear consensus. We are setting up a commission to tell us what would be a fair way for everyone to pay into this new system.”
The paper says the commission will take into consideration people’s ability to pay, intergenerational fairness, the potential impacts on people preparing for their retirement and whether people should save for their care over their whole lifetime or contribute at the end of their life.
If the commission’s recommendations to ministers are accepted, they will be implemented in the parliament after next.
This follows pressure from the Conservative Party who have recently campaigned against one option set out in last year’s green paper, a compulsory levy paid on death to fund care needs.
Government is also setting a National Care Service Leadership Group to help take its social care reform agenda forward.
The leadership group, made up of expert stakeholders, will advise Government on the implementation of the National Care Service, focussing on the systems and business processes that need to be put in place to make the service a reality.
The paper says that the National Care Service will be phased in three stages.
Health Secretary Burnham says phase one will see Government build on the best of the current system through reforms that are already underway and deliver the Personal Care at Home Bill.
As part of stage two, from 2014 Government will extend the coverage of free care so that people will receive free care if they need to stay in residential care for more than two years.
Also under second two, Government will introduce a National Care Service Bill to set the legal foundations of the care service. It will also push forward with the prevention agenda and continue the drive towards personal budgets so that by 2012 everyone who would benefit from a personal budget will have one.
Stage three will see the introduction of a National Care Service that is free for all adults with an eligible care need, funded by contributions.
Symponia joint-managing director Janet Davies questions the funding of the new commission and a potential levy.
She says: “Government has proposed a new commission. No doubt at the further expense of the taxpayer. Do we need a new commission? Well, we need something more than Andy Burnham and his current Government, neither or which appear to have the first clue about what to do or who do to it with.
“If they can see beyond the walls of Westminster and look into the combined faces of the care sector and ordinary financial experts then maybe, just maybe, they could actually put forward real suggestions about the future of adult social care.”
She adds: “A compulsory levy? Firstly, this is just a New Labour word for additional tax. Just how will it be compulsory? How will the long term sick, the unemployed and those on low-incomes find this, at what age should it paid and how?”
Association of British Insurers director of general insurance and health Nick Starling says the new commission needs to work with the insurance industry, and not overlook it.
He says: “With an ever greater strain on public finances and the scale of the funding challenge ahead, long-term social care needs new thinking and new solutions. The Government’s own findings, said that the insurance sector has a key role to play in the provision of long-term care. UK insurers stand ready to play their part in tackling this vital issue for the future of the country.”
If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Money Marketing and Follow @_moneymarketing





Readers' comments (8)
Martyn Collins | 30 Mar 2010 3:36 pm
We need a radical move...not more and more white papers to chew over for many years. One thing that could be done to offset costs of care for the elderly would be to put would be prisoners through a similar assessment to people requiring care. So if they can afford to pay for their care costs then they pay and this money could then be used to help cover the costs of the elderly. I am staying with a friend who used to be a prison officer and she tells me that the inmates of her prison had a menu to choose from once a day so they could select thier food for the following day. My mother is in a care home and does not get such a choice! So it appears to me that we have a society that looks after its criminal fraternity better than its elderly law abiding citizens. I will lead you to ponder as to why that maybe! Maybe crime does pay?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 30 Mar 2010 3:40 pm
Phil Hope? Is this April 1 yet???
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 30 Mar 2010 4:46 pm
Andy Burnham confirmed residents in care would have to fund their accommodation costs and wouldn't have to sell their home in their own lifetime, so what is new about that? A deferred payments scheme already exists, and surely Attendance Allowance goes some way towards funding care costs.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Richard Brown, Managing Director, Moneynotion Limi | 30 Mar 2010 7:09 pm
What we REALLY need is someone with spine and common decency in government! The Labour plans are too little too late and the Conservatives' idea of a "voluntary" insurance plan is no better, except it may happen sooner.
Someone works and pays taxes for 50 years and then we can't fund their long term care?
If we made a rule that only those who have paid into the State for a minimum of, say, 2 years get benefits, we'd probably be able to fund long term care.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Mr Smug | 30 Mar 2010 7:48 pm
The National Care Service Glossary
'Everyone will pay into it in a fair way' - Watch out - here comes a new tax.
'We are setting up a commission' - we can't make a decision ourselves so we are setting up a new quango to do it for us. It will be staffed exclusively by our buddies on very nice packages. Everyone will contribute to the cost of the quango in a new way.
'from 2014 Government will extend the coverage of free care so that people will receive free care if they need to stay in residential care for more than two years.' - Does this strike you as strange? The problem is with the poorest but after two years the estates of the poor will be decimated by care costs. The estates of the rich will be nicely protected.
And hence the National Care Service achieves its goals. Employment for Labours friends and protection of the estates of the rich.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 31 Mar 2010 9:17 am
No one really has asked the question why young families, working class people, and others finding it already hard to make ends meet should have to pay more tax basically to protect another family's inheritance, and in many cases make those beneficiaries richer. The system already exists to provide care for the elderly, and through the deferred payments scheme no one is forced to sell their home in their lifetime. It already costs the tax payer a fortune. If the resident has substantial assets then they are lucky enough to have more choice where that care is provided.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 31 Mar 2010 11:07 am
Wasn't there a Royal Commission set up in 1997 reported 2 years later into long term care? Didn't this government just ignore its findings and recommendations for 10 years!! and now we start the whole meaningless process again.... beggars belief.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 31 Mar 2010 12:41 pm
More smoke and mirrors.
Dont work, no tax, work
tax tax tax. No wonder the country is broke.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment