X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

Please note: Previously subscribers used a 'WebID' to log into the website. Your subscriber number is not the same as the WebID. Please ensure you use the subscriber number when you link your subscription.

Coffee House

Social care reforms: the good and bad news

11 February 2013

9:02 AM

11 February 2013

9:02 AM

Jeremy Hunt is unveiling the government’s long-awaited reforms to the funding of social care today. This is the next announcement in the government’s mid-term review series, and while it addresses a serious issue, it’s probably the biggest disappointment to date, and not just because it doesn’t match the ambition of the reforms proposed by Andrew Dilnot.

The good news is that no-one will have to pay more than £75,000 for the costs of their social care: that is the personal help, washing, and clothing, but not the cost of accommodation or food. The government says this upper limit means insurance companies will now be able to offer policies which cover the money spent up to that £75,000 cap, which means the concerns of charities and campaigners that are widely reported this morning are unfounded. It is finally getting to grips with a serious and growing problem in our society.

[Alt-Text]


The bad news is that the cap itself is higher than Dilnot recommended: his review recommended that the state should step in at the much lower level of £35,000. The Treasury couldn’t stomach the £2 billion cost of that in the current climate (which Dilnot himself acknowledged on the Today programme), and that the cap needed to be higher. This brings us onto our second problem, and the one that will cause problems within the Conservative party: the funding of the £75,000 cap that the government has settled on. This £1 billion system will be funded through a freeze on the threshold for inheritance tax at £325,000 until 2019, which means more families at the lower end of the scale will be dragged into paying the tax. The threshold would have been £420,000 in 2019 without the freeze.

Remember, it was George Osborne’s party conference pledge that the threshold for inheritance tax would rise from £300,000 to £1 million that acted as a major contributor to the Election That Never Was in 2007. This has now become a Pledge That Still Isn’t Happening. Whether or not it’s the better thing to do in order to get to grips with the cost of social care, it means Tory MPs, already rather jumpy after last week’s gay marriage vote and the continuing absence of a tax break for married couples that many had hoped for, have something else to mutter under their breath about, especially when raising the inheritance tax threshold had long been marketed as a totemic Conservative pledge.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
Close