Proceeding contribution from Stephen Dorrell (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 12 January 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Personal Care at Home Bill.
Personal Care at Home Bill
Of course I have an appreciation of that, but I would like the Secretary of State to consider how he is going to explain to that same group of people who have paid out under the current regime that they will get free personal care when they are in their own home, but, as their care needs become more exaggerated and they have to go into residential care, they will have to start paying again. How is he going to explain that to them? That will be the consequence of the policy prescription that he is introducing. I have three concerns about the Bill, as I have said. The first is the human rights implication. The second is the implication for broader social care delivery of the introduction of free care for this group of people. The third echoes the question raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Eddisbury (Mr. O'Brien) and the hon. Member for North Norfolk: where is the money coming from? The Government say that this will involve £500 million, but I do not believe that. I certainly do not believe that it will be £500 million when the behavioural impact has been taken into account. At a time of huge competition for resources, the Department has been landed with bad policy by the Prime Minister, which will lead to resources being channelled to a particular group of people. Those people are very deserving—I do not deny that. I accept that they will benefit, and that they have contributed substantially to their care. They will suddenly receive that care free for as long as they do not need to be in residential care. Of course they will be significant beneficiaries, but seen in the context of the pressure on resources that the Government of this country—whoever they are—will have to address, over not just the next six to 12 months but the next five years, this seems to be bad policy which has been made on the hoof and will have all kinds of long-term negative consequences that have not been thought through. I entirely agree with the criticisms of the Bill that have been articulated by Lord Lipsey, and I rest my case on his presentation of the case.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 503 c656-7
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Community care Capital rules Chronic illnesses Fees and charges Human rights Eligibility Home care services Means-tested benefits Sheltered housing Social services
- Legislation
- Personal Care at Home Bill 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-11 10:01:39 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_607473
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_607473
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_607473