Councils warn of 'major weaknesses' in Gordon Brown's care plans

In a letter to The Times, councillors said the Personal Care at Home Bill, going through Parliament, had "major weaknesses", was unfunded and would mean cuts to current services.

The legislation would provide 400,000 vulnerable elderly people with free personal care in their homes, at an annual cost of £670 million.

Gordon Brown has said he also wants to provide "reablement" and rehabilitation support to all over-65s in England.

The 78 signatories, representing all three major parties and every region in England, wrote: "We fully support the principle of providing additional support to those with the most critical care needs.

"What we cannot support, however, is a piece of legislation that has major weaknesses and which risks adding further strain to an existing system already under considerable financial pressure."

It concludes: "It is also wrong to raise expectations among many of the most vulnerable in our society and their families that they may be in a position to benefit from these proposals when the reality may be significantly different."

The plan for free home care has sparked concerns over how it will be funded, with critics accusing the Government of underestimating how much it will cost and how many people would use it.

Of the £670 million total, £420 million is to come from existing Department of Health budgets, with local authorities expected to provide the remaining £250 million from efficiency savings.

Local authorities claim that it will require each social care provider to find a further £3 million to £10 million.

David Finch, the Conservative chairman of social care at Essex County Council, said that all councillors were in agreement about the impact this would have on current services, including programmes already running to help people to live independently for as long as possible.

He said: "I haven't heard a single differing voice. It's not that the idea is not valid. It is that the way it is being implemented has not been thought through in any way. This is going to mean funds are diverted from needy adult social care services in order to finance this package.

"(The Government) is providing the public with all sorts of goodies. It comes as no coincidence that a general election is just around the corner and then suddenly all these promises are appearing."

Care Services Minister Phil Hope told The Times that it was "extremely disappointing" that councillors supported the principles of the Bill, but would "quibble and complain and find reasons not to make it happen".

"Care recipients in these council areas will be shocked that local authorities are apparently unable to find efficiencies to deliver this priority when significant funding is being provided by the Government," he said.