Theresa May's 'puzzling' social care voucher idea faces ridicule
‘Being told you can’t have an insurance system but you can have some vouchers to help you save, some of the money you would need if your house were to burn down, I don’t think would really be the answer’
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Vouchers to address the crisis in social care provisions have been ridiculed as “puzzling” by Sir Andrew Dilnot, who carried out a government review into funding for the support in England during the coalition.
It comes after reports emerged suggesting Theresa May is considering a voucher scheme to help families meet the soaring costs of elderly social care, requiring workers to sacrifice some of their salary to benefit – mirroring childcare vouchers.
The Prime Minister has previously hinted the Conservative party manifesto could address the issue as she told supporters at an election campaign speech that politicians can no longer “duck the issue” and that her Government had been “working on a long-term solution” for the needs of an ageing population.
But Sir Andrew, who carried out a government review into funding for care and support in England during in 2010, said all politicians had, so far, failed in their attempts to alleviate the pressures on the system and urged the party that wins the general election to act urgently.
On the suggestion of vouchers, however, Sir Andrew, said “we should always be very weary until we actually see what is in the manifestos” and poured cold water on the idea. “I’m puzzled by the suggestion,” he said.
“The system we have at the moment it is one where… imagine it was your house rather than your social care, you’ve got no way of protecting your house from burning down, you need an insurance system for that. Being told you can’t have an insurance system but you can have some vouchers to help you save, some of the money you would need if your house were to burn down, I don’t think would really be the answer.”
On the triple lock, Mr Dilnot said: “I think if you’re concerned about the welfare of pensioners, doing something about social care is probably more important and more valuable than the triple lock. There is scope for some adjustment between the two.”
He also urged the next government to urgently implement the recommendations of his 2011 report. “I do think it is time for us to stop talking and start acting,” he added. “The peak of my frustration came just after the last election when the manifesto commitment was at least ditched or postponed, so I hope that all of the parties in this election campaign will be clear that they are going to act.
“It’s perfectly reasonable to have a Green Paper as long as it’s soon and as long as it’s a Green Paper that sets out action that is going to be implemented very quickly. But be should by November of this year – absolutely without no doubt – have set in place implementation plans to deal with this.
“The number of us who are growing old is increasing and that should be a matter of enormous celebration. This is one are though that we haven’t got sorted out and in a civilised country we really ought to.”
Last month Mr Dilnot condemned Britain’s social care system as “the most pernicious means-test in the whole of the British welfare state”.
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments