Lib Dems call for faster action on social care in England

Senior Liberal Democrats have expressed concern that the Labour Government has finally done something about social care, but that Louise Casey’s review will not report until 2028. This has all the hallmarks of this crucial issue being kicked into the long grass, with potential for it to be lost in even deeper foliage beyond then.

Ed Davey told LBC that he was sceptical on the timing. He says that we should have cross party talks, but we have all the information we need so that they should be completed within a year.

He told Channel 4 News that this process should be done within the year. If we do sort out social care, it brings huge benefits to families and savings to the NHS.  Without proper care, people end up in hospital unnecessarily and that is a huge cost to the NHS.

He also pointed out that we need to value care workers, with a higher minimum wage.

He also called for greater support for family carers.

We won’t, he said, solve the wider crisis in the NHS without resolving social care, which is why a faster timescale is essential.

Layla Moran, as Chair of the Commons Select Committee on Health and Social Care, said:

This announcement from the Government on a commission to look at social care is welcome, however this cannot be an exercise in kicking the can down the road. We urge bravery and courage from the Government and all political parties to work together to act boldly and urgently.

We are concerned that any further delay perpetuates the hardship for individuals and their families, as well as the cost to the NHS and local authorities.

The first inquiry our Committee launched is investigating the costs resulting from delays to reform of the social care sector. In the first evidence session of this inquiry next week we will hear from experts on the subject, including Sir Andrew Dilnot and we will ask what impact inaction has had, fourteen years on from the Dilnot Commission’s recommendations to reform social care.

Our 2024 manifesto outlined our plans for social care in England. We will:

Provide truly personalised care that empowers individuals by:

Trialling personal health and social care budgets so that individuals are in control of what care they receive.
Rolling out digital platforms for care users to develop networks, relationships and opportunities, connecting with care workers, friends and family, voluntary groups and more.
Improving communication standards so carers can support care users to co-produce and monitor care plans.
Developing a digital strategy for tech-enabled lives.
Establishing an Independent Living Taskforce to help people live independently in their own homes, as set out in chapter 10.

End the postcode lottery of service provision and provide national, high-quality care for everyone who needs it by:
Providing predictable, consistent funding for free personal care.
Increasing transparency and accountability as to how money is spent through local authorities.
Creating a National Care Agency to set national minimum standards of care.
Enabling individuals to transfer their care package so they don’t feel stuck in their current locality due to their care needs.

Give unpaid carers a fair deal by:
Increasing Carer’s Allowance and expanding eligibility for it, as set out in chapter 10.
Introducing a statutory guarantee of regular respite breaks for unpaid carers.
Introducing paid carer’s leave, building on the entitlement to unpaid leave secured by the Liberal Democrats.
Making caring a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and requiring employers to make reasonable adjustments to enable employees with caring responsibilities to provide that care.
Introducing a Young Carers Pupil Premium as part of an ‘Education Guarantee’ for young carers.

Make careers in social care more attractive and value experienced staff to improve retention by:
Creating a new Carer’s Minimum Wage, boosting the minimum wage for care workers by £2 an hour, as a starting point for improved pay across the sector.
Creating clear career pathways, linked to recommended pay scales, which put an end to the undervaluing of skills in the sector.
Creating a career ladder to allow flexibility to work across the NHS and social care, allowing staff to gain experience in both.
Creating a Royal College of Care Workers to represent this skilled workforce.
Expanding the NHS Digital Staff Passport to include the care sector.

Recruit more staff to the sector with a social care workforce plan, akin to the NHS England workforce plan, that includes ethical international recruitment.

Support people to age well by:
Establishing a Commissioner for Older People and Ageing.
Rolling out active ageing programmes and trips and falls assessments for everyone over the age of 75 to prevent falls, avoid unnecessary hospital admissions and promote healthy ageing.
Opening fracture liaison services so that osteoporosis patients can get the treatment they need and prevent long-term issues and costs.

Support children in kinship care and their family carers by:
Introducing a statutory definition of kinship care.
Building on the existing pilot to develop a weekly allowance for all kinship carers.

Make care experience a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 to strengthen the rights of people who are in or have been in care.

Refresh the national strategy for loneliness collaboratively with service providers and people who have lived experience of loneliness, to be overseen by a dedicated Minister for Tackling Loneliness.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

12 Comments

  • Craig Levene 5th Jan '25 - 12:50pm

    I’m not keen on the minimum wage being raised for just a certain section of the workforce that are deemed worthy . Someone working in the kitchen of a care home should be deemed just as important as someone delivering that care. They are both underpaid.
    We should be concentrating on raising the MW for all , not pigeonholing who or who isn’t worthy of a raise .

  • Nigel Jones 5th Jan '25 - 2:40pm

    Craig, we already have different salary/wage scales for different jobs, each having a starting figure which is therefore the minimum that is paid for that job. So that argument is not so much about an absolute minimum but about what the minimum should be or can be for each type of job.

  • Craig Levene 5th Jan '25 - 3:31pm

    Yes Nigel. I’m against a minimum wage that legislates to seperate those into a catogory that are deemed more worthy than others in receiving a rise . The rise should be applied universally .

  • I agree with Craig about th minimum wage, we’ve recently seen the “Sky is falling in” response to the changes made in the autumn budget (*). However, there is no reason why the Carers Allowance shouldn’t be additional, with similar allowances for other professsions

    (*) From what I’ve seen the issue is actually down to how many businesses didn’t increase wages in 2023 and 2024, and thus in April 2025 they have to make a big adjustment. One client will need to increase wages by ~20% to restore staff wage levels to April 2023…

  • @Nigel: there’s a huge difference between different jobs paying different rates because that is what the market rate is, and the Government mandating a particular universal minimum rate for a job. I agree with Craig – I feel very uneasy at the Government declaring that one person’s job is more valuable than another person’s job and therefore mandates a higher statutory minimum wage. Besides, those kinds of controls on pricing amounts to a huge Government interference in the market – and that kind of interference usually causes more harm than good. If we want carers to be paid more (and we are willing to shoulder the cost of paying more – remember, if you increase salaries then SOMEONE has to pay for that increase), then we need to look at the industry and figure out what is causing the market rate to be so low. Most likely, it’s a simple case of supply and demand, plus what customers are willing to pay.

  • This is a sound policy. Care assistants need to be paid 13.44 an hour – it is still a pittance. Those peeling spuds in a care home kitchen or those cleaning a care home do worthy work but that work does not merit the same salary as care assistants who have expertise in dementia, first aid, safe lifting, therapeutic activities, deprivation of liberty safeguards, risk management and many other under rated skills.

  • Jenny Barnes 6th Jan '25 - 7:26am

    2028 will either be in the middle of an election campaign or in the run-up to one. The probability of parties agreeing on contentious social service plans then will be very low. So nothing will be done.

  • Jenny is exactly right. In May we mark 80 years since the end of the Second World War. Politicians will wax sentimental about our remaining WW2 veterans. The WW2 generation, people in their late 90s and 100s suffer the most from the government’s cop-out on social care. By 2028 they will all be gone.

  • Steve Trevethan 6th Jan '25 - 9:52am

    Might the L. D. Party develop the helpful outline above by including indicative money, timings and attitude management inputs/“costs”?

    Might such make opposition to the government’s policy of assertive avoidance more incisive and so effective?

  • Nick Collins 6th Jan '25 - 3:53pm

    On this morning’s BBC ” Today” programme the Minister alleged that the reason for wasting three years on yet another review, rather than using the government’s substantial majority to press ahead and get something done, was the need to create a consensus. For the reason stated by Jenny Barnes above, the government line is the most arrant nonsense since the probability of creating a consensus in three years’ time is zero.

  • Nonconformistradical 6th Jan '25 - 4:02pm

    I agree with Nick (Collins).

    ‘ using the government’s substantial majority to press ahead and get something done’

    Quite. Just f***ing do it!!

  • Steve Comer 6th Jan '25 - 4:18pm

    I think the problem here is that the Treasury is impacably opposed to doing anything about social care funding.
    So we have yet another review reporting in three years time. This will mean it is in the pre-election period, consensus between parties will be impossible, so once again nothing will get done. British bureacratic inertia at its best!

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • John Mc
    This is all good stuff, but honestly, who is really getting to hear it? Reform have 5 MPs yet seem to be being anointed as a government in waiting. The LDs hav...
  • Simon R
    @David Evans: Are you seriously trying to compare maintaining the level of the pension at its current level in real terms (which is what would be implied by scr...
  • David Evans
    Hi Simon (R), I do have difficulty in understanding how you can make such a post and justify it by the one reason, "That doesn’t seem to me like something to ...
  • David Raw
    As someone of a certain generation whose Party slogan was "People matter, People Count", I've nothing to add to the BBC News today : "As Palestinians pou...
  • Simon R
    @Cassie: Why do you feel that talk about ending the triple lock should make pensioners worry? Ending the triple lock doesn't mean anything silly or mean like en...