- Davey: Spending review cannot be used to cut social care as number requesting support set to rise by 500,000 a year
- Winter Fuel Payments: Govt has realised “how disastrous this policy was” but misery caused “cannot be overstated”
- Nigel Farage Port Talbot speech – Real cheek as Trump threatens remains of Welsh steel industry
- Liberal Democrat MP Wendy Chamberlain warns the government risks ‘decimating’ rural communities ahead of Spending Review
- Lee Waters comments – nonsense, that Welsh funding isn’t a party-political issue
- Farage promising to re-open mines shows he doesn’t understand Wales
- Jardine comments on winter fuel news
Davey: Spending review cannot be used to cut social care as number requesting support set to rise by 500,000 a year
- Ed Davey calls on Chancellor to rule out “devastating” cuts to social care in Spending Review
- An extra 500,000 people a year could need social care support by the time Government reforms come into force in 2036
- Liberal Democrat Leader calls for named carer and social care worker for every family in need of care
Liberal Democrat Leader Ed Davey has called on the Chancellor to rule out any cuts to social care funding at this week’s Spending Review warning they would be “devastating” for those in need of care. It comes as research by the party reveals that an additional 500,000 people a year could need social care support by the time the Government’s reforms are expected to finally be completed in 2036.
Ed Davey is also calling for a named carer and social worker to be assigned to each family in need. He made the call in his recent book ‘Why I Care: And Why Care Matters.’ It would mean that for the UK’s 6 million unpaid carers, each of their families would have a professional that would be assigned to focussing on their needs and who they knew by name. This would make for more efficient and better care due to the experience that each of these named carers and social care workers would have with each family.
It comes as it has been reported that social care reforms from the Casey review due to be completed in three years time may not be in place until 2036, more than a decade from now. The Liberal Democrats have previously called for this review to be completed by the end of this year, not the three it is currently scheduled for, and the reforms implemented as soon as possible.
Analysis by the Liberal Democrats has shown that if the number of people requesting social care continues to increase at the same rate as it has historically from 2017/18 until now – 1.79% on average annually – then an additional 495,000 people a year will be requesting support by 2036. It means by 2035/36 the number of those requesting support each year could have risen from 2.1 million to 2.6 million.
Despite the turmoil in social care, the Chancellor has yet to rule out any cuts to the sector. It has been reported that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, which provides funding to councils who provide social care, are still yet to reach a funding settlement with the Chancellor.
The crisis in care is already cascading into the NHS. Care England said last year that over 45% of hospital discharge delays were linked to social care, with separate research showing around 16 million bed days lost to bed blocking in the past 3.5 years, an average of 12,772 a day and costing the NHS £2 billion a year.
In recent months, hospitals have experienced bed occupancy levels of 96%, well above the safety limit of 85%. This contributes to long delays in A&Es as people cannot be admitted into hospital, with previous analysis suggesting that there were 16,600 deaths associated with long A&E waits before admission in England last year – a rise of 20% on 2023.
Liberal Democrat Leader Ed Davey said:
Any further cuts to social care at the spending review would be devastating for the countless people in desperate need of care. Years of Conservative neglect broke the system, with massive consequences for our health service, but now the Labour government is moving at a snail’s pace in addressing this crisis.
Without fixing social care, we cannot fix the NHS so it beggars belief that ministers seem willing to let the rot continue. We simply cannot wait more than a decade for reforms to be put in place, whilst the number of people suffering grows.
The Government needs to get serious and that starts by completing their review by the end of the year with the reforms to follow as quickly as possible alongside introducing a named carer for each family who needs support.
At this week’s Spending Review, the Chancellor must realise that social care cannot take any more cuts and rule them out. If Rachel Reeves goes ahead the consequences could be catastrophic.
Winter Fuel Payments: Govt has realised “how disastrous this policy was” but misery caused “cannot be overstated”
Responding to the Chancellor’s announcement regarding changes to the eligibility thresholds for Winter Fuel Payments, Liberal Democrat Leader Ed Davey said:
Finally the Chancellor has listened to the Liberal Democrats and the tireless campaigners in realising how disastrous this policy was, but the misery it has caused cannot be overstated.
Countless pensioners were forced to choose between heating and eating all whilst the Government buried its head in the sand for months on end, ignoring those who were really suffering.
We will now study the detail of this proposal closely to make sure those who need support actually get that support. The pain they went through this winter cannot be for nothing.
Nigel Farage Port Talbot speech – Real cheek as Trump threatens remains of Welsh steel industry
Commenting ahead of Nigel Farage’s visit to Wales today, Welsh Liberal Democrat Leader Jane Dodds MS said:
Nigel Farage has some real cheek to come to Port Talbot and promise them the world while his best mate Donald Trump is threatening to destroy the remnants of our steel industry, with yet more tariffs at the end of this month.
Like his idols, Donald Trump and Liz Truss, Nigel Farage would wreck the Welsh economy and local services with unfunded tax cuts and the hollowing out of public services.
I understand that a lot of people are frustrated that they have been let down by Labour in Wales and the Conservatives across the entire UK, but it’s the Liberal Democrats who are offering real change, not Reform. We are passionate local campaigners focused on getting you swift access to local healthcare and ensuring that schools are safe places for our kids.
Last year’s general election shows that we are winning again. And in a recent by-election in Neath Port Talbot, we easily beat Reform and pushed Labour into 4th place in the sort of industrial heartlands both claim ownership of.
Liberal Democrat MP Wendy Chamberlain warns the government risks ‘decimating’ rural communities ahead of Spending Review
Scottish Liberal Democrat deputy leader and MP for North East Fife has warned the UK Government risks ‘decimating’ rural communities, amidst rumours the nature-friendly farming budget is set to be slashed in the upcoming Spending Review.
North East Fife has a proud farming heritage with 844 farms. 80% of the constituency is classed as rural.
However, many farmers, both in North East Fife and across the country, are struggling after the economic mismanagement of the previous Conservative government, botched trade deals and a cost-of-living crisis. Family farms are also facing the impacts of IHT reforms, and for many small farms, the problems of transfer to Universal Credit.
The Liberal Democrats are now urging the government to protect our rural communities and the environment by ruling out cuts to the farming budget.
Liberal Democrat MP for North East Fife, Wendy Chamberlain said:
Here in North East Fife we are proud of our farming heritage. We are home to 844 farms, from livestock to arable and everything in between. Oats, soft fruits – incredible strawberries, – dairy and meat. We have it all.
Many farmers are barely making ends meet, working for half the minimum wage, yet they still tirelessly maintain our countryside, allowing us all to enjoy its beauty and food produced to the highest standards.
The government is treating our rural communities with gobsmacking contempt. If the government goes ahead with these cuts, they risk the future of farming in this country and with it, domestic food production and the restoration of nature.
The government’s utter failure to understand rural communities risks decimating them. At the spending review, these cuts cannot come to pass. The Liberal Democrats in North East Fife and across Scotland will continue to stand up for our farmers.
Lee Waters comments – nonsense, that Welsh funding isn’t a party-political issue
Responding the Lee Waters’ comments on Welsh funding, Welsh Liberal Democrat Westminster Spokesperson David Chadwick MP said:
Lee Waters is wrong when he says this isn’t a party-political issue – it is.
While parties like the Liberal Democrats are fighting for fair funding for Wales, Labour are making an active political choice to keep the unfair systems in place that the Conservative Government operated under.
The Welsh Labour First Minster even attempted to defend the designation of East-West Rail after I revealed it the Treasury’s designation would deprive Wales of yet more funding.
Labour cannot keep pretending that their Senedd Members and MPs are in different parties in an attempt to cover up their own ineptitude. The Welsh public won’t be taken for fools.
Farage promising to re-open mines shows he doesn’t understand Wales
Responding to Nigel Farage’s speech in Port Talbot, where he promised to reopen the mines, Welsh Liberal Democrat Westminster Spokesperson David Chadwick MP said:
Mining was our past, but it can’t be our future. I know my relatives in South Wales worked hard to ensure that their children and grandchildren wouldn’t have to do the dangerous work of going down the pits and for future generations to have better opportunities in life.
The fact that Nigel Farage doesn’t see this shows how poorly he understands Welsh communities. The Welsh Liberal Democrats will be fighting to give former industrial communities what they really want, which is modern, well-paid jobs in new industries, investment in their public services and support for small businesses, not false hope based on harking back to the past.
Jardine comments on winter fuel news
Responding to the Chancellor’s announcement regarding the winter fuel payment, Liberal Democrat Scottish affairs spokesperson Christine Jardine MP said:
This entire mess has caused so much needless pain for hundreds of thousands of Scottish pensioners.
My party played a big role in getting a winter fuel payment reinstated up in Scotland. That’s why we’ll be looking very closely at what today’s announcement could mean for the equivalent Scottish benefit.
In the meantime, the Chancellor must apologise to all those pensioners who had to freeze last winter.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Labour councillor missing in action
New NHS cash will be wasted if social care is left untouched
Prince William's billionaire pal dies after swallowing bee while playing polo
Transition Dundee Ceilidh #dundeewestend
The Trinity made comprehensible.
A remarkable woman and a park
Lib Dems in the King's birthday honours 2025
Andy Daer
Simon R
John Waller
Geoffrey Payne
Andrew Melmoth
11 Comments
I think the wfa pain can be overstated. Especially given that the triple lock means pensioners are no worse off in real terms than 3 years ago. And those getting the credit, significantly better
As a better off pensioner, I do not need and have never needed the WFA. If Rachel Reeves had simply taxed WFA those on low incomes would not have paid tax and still received the full WFA, whilst pensioners like me would have paid more tax. There might have been some whinging, but generally it would have been accepted. The U-turn achieves roughly the same effect but with an income cut off of £35,000 raising slightly more money than just taxing WFA.
Simple economics, but the political cost to Labour will reverberate for some time, a bit like student tuition fees and the LibDems.
It really makes you wonder whether Labour actually had a plan for government at all? Any plan needs changing to meet changing circumstances, but surely this shows Labour hadn’t and still don’t have a plan. No serious plan for government would have had such a mind bogglinly stupid action on it.
Given that the next election in 2029 is going to be a big unknown until it happens, perhaps the LibDems should at the very least have a modest plan for what we would do if the vagaries of FPTP were suddenly to catapult us into power in 2029.
I question whether Labour politicians engaged their brains at all regarding the WFA. It’s so obvious that the first step should simply have been to tax it.
But as I have commented elsewhere, what faith can we have in the ability of the tax system to identify and tax those of us who don’t need it – particularly in circumstances where there is undeclared income not taxed at source?
Russell: is your comment based on actual knowledge or intuition. Visiting homes where the elderly have turned off their heating to balance their budget is no joke and neither is deaths which have occurred.
Mick Taylor: fully endorse, would add we are still being gentle with Labour and hammering the Cons. Need to tackle Labour head on to grab headlines that will resonate with voters up here in the North and Midlands as well as Wales and Scotland.
@Mick Taylor,
True, but taxing WFA at your marginal rate means that those pensioners with incomes over £125,400 still keep 55% of their WFA. There is also the complication that WFA is a household benefit, while income tax is on individuals, so pensioner couples benefit differently, depending on how their income is split between them. Generally, Chancellors seem to prefer making taxation and benefits more complicated rather than simpler; we still have the Christmas bonus of £10 paid to those on certain benefits, including the State Pension and still at the same level as it was when it was introduced in 1972. Sarah Olney in the latest issue of Liberator writes about the effect of cliff edges in the benefits system and it is this we should be taking the Government to task over; the effect of WFA is small compared with some of the cliff edges that can cost people thousands of pounds a year in lost benefits.
@ theakes – “ Visiting homes where the elderly have turned off their heating to balance their budget is no joke …”
Trouble is with the WFA being paid in cash, it is just extra money to balance the budget, so is more likely to be spent on food, reducing debts than putting money in the meter (one of the most expensive ways to pay for energy, yet we think it’s okay for the most vulnerable to pay a substantial premium for their energy…).
@Lawrence Cox. But does it matter? The cost of means testing is far greater than the small amount of WFA left to the small number of pensioners with incomes over £125400.
My actual suggestion was to add the benefit to pensions. Even people who have large incomes in retirement have paid for their old age pensions and are entitled to receive them.
Come to think of it, the real problem is that old age pensions, even allowing for the Steve Webb uplift, are still almost the lowest in Europe and it is nigh on impossible to pay for eating and heating if that’s all you rely on. If pensions were high enough for people to live on, then there would be no need for WFA or supplementary pensions.
I suspect that politicians have baulked at asking people to pay more so that they can have decent pensions in old age. It’s all a part of the myth that you can have Scandinavian levels of services (and pensions) on US levels of taxation. LibDems are complicit in this to some extent. Time to tell people the truth. Pay much more for your pension when you are working and then have a decent retirement.
@Mick Taylor – “ It’s all a part of the myth that you can have Scandinavian levels of services (and pensions) on US levels of taxation.”
Adding to the myth is the belief that US taxes pay for a similar level of service, when they don’t: comparing US tax and expenditure with the UK is like comparing Apples and Oranges. Yes the NHS is expensive, but Americans pay significantly more for a lesser non-universal service. Pensions, are even more hit-and-miss with scams seemingly more common.
@Mick Taylor,
You can always make a problem “go away” by making it invisible; i.e. adding the WFA to the State Pension. It doesn’t mean that it isn’t being paid. My objection is to Reeves not clawing it back from richer pensioners using income tax. Before the Coalition Government we had higher personal allowances for older people; those disappeared when the personal allowance was raised to its present level. They could be reintroduced with the higher personal allowance tapered off, just as the existing personal allowance is tapered above £100k, but not as steeply. That would be very easy to sell as giving more money to the poorest pensioners. £200 would be equivalent to £1k extra personal allowance, allowing the Chancellor to ditch the WFA entirely except for those whose income is below the personal allowance.
Paying for energy on PAYG meters mentioned above. We should be campaigning for the standing charges to be abolished on up to average fuel consumption. All the uplifts for green conversion to be charged by the unit on above average fuel consumption. So no longer would people be putting money in their meters just to pay the standing charge, possibly for several days when they couldn’t afford any gas or elec.