Certainty of uncertain future

As the consultation period on the best way to create a fairer and simpler social care system ends, Sunil Peck assesses the impact so far of current proposals on disabled people, some possible future developments and the prevailing mood

The Government’s green paper on social care contained elements which were welcomed by disabled people, including a one-off assessment of needs and the aspiration that everybody should have some of their social care needs paid for by the state.

But the positive aspects of the green paper have been overshadowed by the lingering confusion and uncertainty about how the social care system should be funded.

The Government has ruled out funding the new system from direct taxation and has instead proposed three models for funding it, all of which have advantages and disadvantages.

But after promising to make public the calculations underpinning the funding options, they announced ten days before the end of the consultation period that the calculations would not be revealed until early in the new year which is around the time that the white paper is expected.

This makes one wonder whether the Government has doubts about the viability of its own schemes. It has also increased suspicions in some quarters that the consultation period has been nothing more than a PR exercise and that the white paper has been written already.

The issue which has provoked most fears since the publication of the green paper is the future of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) and Attendance Allowance (AA). The Government says that there is a case for integrating some benefits that are not means tested, such as Attendance Allowance, into a central pot to be controlled by local authorities.

It took the Government three months, but after conflicting announcements about the future of DLA from ministers and pressure from campaigners, the health secretary Andy Burnham (pictured) ruled out abolishing it for people under the age of 65.

But it is still unclear what will happen to DLA for people over 65 and also which other benefits are under consideration for integration into a funding stream administered by local authorities. All that the care services minister Phil Hope has said is that anybody over 65 whose benefits are cut will receive an equivalent level of support under the new system and that he is interested to hear which benefits the public think should be abolished.

But for all its trumpeting of the importance of people to engage with the consultation document, it nevertheless went ahead and pledged free home care for people with critical needs six weeks before the consultation closed.

This may look good as an election pledge, but it’s still unclear what the definition of critical needs will be and what level of care those people who do qualify will receive.

But it is also unclear whether the current Government will be in a position to introduce this measure or their vision for a national care service after the next election.