Peter Adams, Editor

You would probably have had to have been living in a cave on Mars not to know that 2012 is a crucial year for not only Britain’s economy but almost the whole world.

As economics are discussed, social care funding will once again be a major “political football”, with many politicians and analysts offering almost everything except a solution.

Earlier this month 63 organisations signed an open letter to the coalition government warning that some people faced losing their homes due to spiralling social care bills, and calling for urgent cross-party talks to sort out the system of social care in England and Wales, ahead of a white paper due in the spring.

From what I can gather (and I am open to correction) this “white paper” when it is published does not address the most contentious issue regarding social care, or in simple terms “The Elephant in the Room”, that being funding.

To my mind any discussion about anything, but in particular social care which does not discuss funding is doomed from the outset.

Again, from what I can gather laws to improve care standards will still be brought in before the next election, but actual implementation of the funding could be put off until after the 2020 election. Scandalous, truly scandalous.

As you are no doubt aware, last year saw a high profile review by economist Andrew Dilnot. His independent review of social care funding, commissioned by the government, was published in the summer of 2011. It recommended a £1.7bn increase in funding and a £35,000 cap on the amount that an individual is expected to contribute to social care costs. Although the Dilnot commission focused largely on older people, its recommendations also provide solid foundations for improving support for disabled people. However, according to reports I have read the government believes these proposals too expensive to implement immediately, since then it has taken more than nine months to get to a white paper stage.

With discussions, reports and commissions ongoing what will the immediate future bring? Well, what we will see no doubt is increased litigation much like the one highlighted by the RNHA in which they warned councils will need to make sure the fees they pay care homes to look after older people reflect the actual costs of providing care, this warning followed a case in which care homes in the Sefton area won a legal battle against their local authority for freezing their fees for the past two years running. Hopefully as RNHA chief executive Frank Ursell says, this “Landmark” decision means that councils have a statutory obligation to adopt realistic funding and cannot apportion responsibility elsewhere.

Peter Adams
Editor