Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Norman Lamb (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Monday, 14 December 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Personal Care at Home Bill.


Personal Care at Home Bill

The hon. Member for South Thanet hit the nail on the head, because the number of people who will benefit is much lower than the headline number of 400,000 of which the Government have sought to convince the public. I want to deal with the potential perverse effects of the Bill. It is a partial solution, and the risk of implementing a partial solution was highlighted by Niall Dickson. Andrew Harrop of Age Concern and Help the Aged also specifically highlighted the risk that the Bill will push councils into getting people into care homes, thereby avoiding the cost of caring for people at home. According to Andrew Harrop, there is the alternative risk that councils will argue that someone's need is not critical—that as a way of avoiding responsibility they will find that people fall below the level. There is also a risk that the Bill will take money away from some vulnerable groups in order to give it to a particular group of vulnerable people and that we will end up with a costly and demeaning process of disputes about whether someone's care needs are "critical". We are likely to see a bureaucratic and time-consuming process of social workers carrying out assessments to determine whether someone's needs are "substantial" or "critical".


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
502 c700 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Care homes Community care Chronic illnesses Finance Fees and charges Eligibility Housing improvement Home care services Local government finance Social services
Legislation
Personal Care at Home Bill 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk