Afternoon:
9°c
Two benefits currently claimed by 2.4 million pensioners may be axed to fund free personal care, the Government confirmed today.
Downing Street said Disability Living Allowance and Attendance Allowance were both options to be scrapped — but stressed that no existing claimant would lose out.
David Cameron earlier claimed over-65 claimants were set to lose payments worth an average £3,400 each to pay for Gordon Brown's flagship plan for a National Care Service, unveiled in yesterday's Queen's Speech. Mr Cameron said: “It is a good idea to help people in their homes but the Prime Minister appears to be proposing to abolish these benefits that people rely on.”
The first stage of Mr Brown's plan will provide free personal care at home for 280,000 of the most needy elderly and disabled people, avoiding them being forced into a care home, at a cost of £670 million. The full package being proposed for a fourth Labour term is officially estimated to cost £18 billion to 20 billion, requiring radical funding decisions and possibly compulsory payments into a special scheme.
The Personal Care at Home Bill came under separate attack from two senior Labour peers. Lord Lipsey, a former member of the Royal Commission on Long-Term Care, said the £670 million costs were “a demolition job on the national budget” because it would raid existing NHS spending. He told The Times Mr Brown's announcement was like “an admiral firing an Exocet into his own warship”. Former health minister Lord Warner said: “There has been no proper impact assessment, and no data to show how this would work. There's a big question mark as to whether there's even actually a Bill ready.”
Culture Secretary Ben Bradshaw defended the scheme. “It's not a demolition job,'” he said. “It's a very, very small part of the National Health Service budget of £120 billion. The idea that you can't find £600 million from a £120 billion budget — tell that to any business.”
Labour will guarantee free care at home for up to 280,000 elderly and disabled people with the highest needs, of whom 166,000 already receive free care. A further 130,000 would benefit from measures such as adaptations to their homes to enable them to live there, helping 400,000 in all.
The legislation was broadly welcomed by disability campaigners.
Speaking on ITV's This Morning, Mr Brown said: “This is a major breakthrough ... if you have got special and urgent needs ... we will help you stay in your own home and you will not have to go into institutional care.”
Reader views (35)
i saw first hand with two elderley people who were looked after by so called carers they were my neighbours they onley spent at least 7 minuites with each neighbour one was robbed of his savings the other ended up in hospital with dirthy feet that had not seen water for months they were agency careers betty
- Betty, forest gate, 20/11/2009 06:39
Report abuse
Brown does not like people who have worked hard all their lives and bought their own homes his party has conditioned people in labour heartlands to think that people who have their own homes are the toffs well they are not in fact there is more money on a council estate than on a private estate and that is fact. I am over 65 and registered blind and because of a chronic eye condition I have to go to a hospital 40 miles away most weeks or maybe once a fortnight ocaationally I may be able to go once a month but even so the trains are expensive the buses run about two a way they used to be more so we go in our car which is a necessity in order to get there the dla helps with that and for any bits which may help me to see a bit better Brown are you listening. who does't he take it from these people who will not work or is it deemed that people on dla are toffs which is derisory for if I called labour voter a cloth cap oaf I would be arrested. by the way I am certainly not rich I have just worked hard and paid my taxes
- Jacqui Williams, peterborough cambs, 19/11/2009 16:41
Report abuse
John Jones,Westminster is not quite accurate in his statement about DLA. If you are on this benefit before you reach 65 years of age,then you continue to be paid after 65. Only if you apply after 65 do you receive Attendance Allowance instead.
- Lester G, NEWTOWNARDS, N Ireland, 19/11/2009 15:05
Report abuse
John Jones asks where is it written that benefits will be abolished?
You may see it written in the Government Green Paper
"Shaping the future of care together" published on the 14th July 2009.
The Green Paper sets out a vision of a new care and support system, highlighting the need for radical reform and developing a National Care Service that is fair, simple and affordable for everyone. It refers to the abolition of the Disability Living Allowance and the Attendance Allowance.
Note that they say "that is affordable for everyone" which is rubbish.
Since the Government announced yesterday that they would only provide free care for a limited number of people that leaves a lot of people who won't be helped. If these have the benefits taken away then how the heck can they afford to pay for care? They will be a lot worse off under New Labour's plans.
- Janet, London, UK, 19/11/2009 15:03
Report abuse
My advice would be for Brown to resign,citing health reasons,its an excuse that's totally plausible,we dont care whether he go's by bus, taxi, train or plane but for heavens sake man just bloody GO.
- Lewd Lucan, Shergars stable, GB., 19/11/2009 14:38
Report abuse
I am looking forward very much to 11,000,000 pensioners marching on Downing Street.
I will be FIRST in the queue!
- Reuben Camara, Plot 1, Morecambe Compound, EUSSR, 19/11/2009 14:34
Report abuse
On the bright side, the Labour party has less than 6 months left in power and then it will be unelectable for a decade at the very least.
- Kevin T, Beckenham, Kent, 19/11/2009 13:57
Report abuse
Personally, I don't see dopey cameron coming up with an alternative as usual. Where would he make savings? Can I suggest one? Cut the enormous £900bn civil sevants pension fund down to something on a par with the normal world and use it to pay off our national debt. If they don't like it, they can try paying in to a pension themselves like the rest of the working population does.
- Mr Opinion, London, 19/11/2009 13:20
Report abuse
I feel that Gordon should resign without delay,he is looking extremely tired of late,I am sure that all the fun has drained out of what at what first looked like THE dream job.He has sampled his William Wallace/Robert the Bruce moment and found to his horror that its not all its cracked up to be,-resign good fellow and return to the Highlands,perhaps he could join the SNP?.
- Jacob, Canterbury Kent., 19/11/2009 13:12
Report abuse
Martin (Sheffield). The chip on your shoulder is weighing you down. Al least that 'toff Cameron' is not a hypocrite. He cannot change his background anymore than you can change yours. It is the champagne socialists who you should be worried about. Cameron knows what a good education is and will try and improve standards for the majority, not drag everyone down, to make us all 'equal'.
- Beatriz, London, 19/11/2009 13:11
Report abuse
A bit rich this line coming from David Cameron trying to make the Conservatives seeming to care about pensioners, since it was his party that removed the link between pensions and earnings in the nineteen eighties. If that had been maintained pensioners would have been much better off in todays society.
- Alex Beveridge, Cumbernauld Scotland., 19/11/2009 12:56
Report abuse
#Sarit
Apologies, I should have said NHS budget for 2010/11 is £110b, (see Google),I hit the wrong key! Nevertheless, the NHS budget has been tripled since 1997. What we should be more concerned about is David Cameron's crass ignorance when he pontificates about cuts in DLA for pensioners, a benefit which they don't receive. He has scant knowledge about allowances for over 65s, in pretty much the same way as George Osborne had when he was crying foul about secret cuts when the figures he was waving about were in the budget statement for all to see.
#Christian Ball
The level of Council Tax (and yes, I do pay it, at band G) is determined by the individual council. It is the councillors who vote on how they are going to distribute their budget, not the government. The very fact that councils are able to reduce their Council Tax this year because there are Local Government elections next year, tells you all you need to know about the level of Council Tax, and how it is used as a stick to beat the government with. I should let you know I am speaking from an informed position as I was a local councillor before I retired.
- Val Daniels, Mijas Costa, Spain, 19/11/2009 12:25
Report abuse
Considering that by 2025 their will be no State Pension left, or as both Labour and Conservative have admitted, at best means tested, it comes as little surprise that Health Care would be next.
As an example, try to find an NHS Dentist- they are few and far between.
In reality, WHY are we paying National Insurance, which was originally designed to make it easy for average man to get the medical help he required and to assist with Unemployment difficulties.
With 3 Million unemployed and most of the work gone to overseas call centres where the person speaks English as a foreign language, let alone understand English Law; will someone tell me: what the point of staying in this Country?
Another brain drain in the making?
I fear so- de ja vu 1974-9 and Dennis Healy cf. Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling.
- Chris Richards, Chelmsford Essex, 19/11/2009 12:08
Report abuse
What does that toff cameron know about struggle.
Expect a lot of cuts next year, watch this space folks.
- Martin, Sheffield, 19/11/2009 12:05
Report abuse
Could'nt put it better myself Anon, it is going to take decades to correct what this government has done, and thats just the social side of things ..... as for the budget, i really dont think people understand just how dire it is, just announced last month they borrowed another £11bil after 15bil the month before and 14bil the month before that, economists used to get worried about deficits over 5% of GDP, we are looking at levels around 15% for years to come... this is getting REALLY scary, they are totally out of control and all we get is the usual spin.
- Rh, london, 19/11/2009 12:03
Report abuse
Well where is your proof Mr Camorichski! And how is a one off payment of £8000 as you propose meant to fund what could be 10 years in a care home?
The NHS was set up as "from cradle to grave" the problem is that we are putting off the end part and so a new system of care in old age is needed to cover the last 20 years of our lives.
Its easy for Camoronrichskis to mock Brown but they are the ones moaning about having to sell the homes to pay for care and should welcome this plan from team GB.
As for country broke its more a case of under taxed given the billions Thatcher gave to the rich in tax cuts and Dave wants to give to himself and his millionaire with inheritence cuts.
If we can afford inheritence cuts we can afford anything and that includes proper equipment for our forces so why has no one asked Camronrichski why he puts inheritence cuts before increased funds for our forces?
AS the say "give us the proof Dave thats all we want!"
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, 19/11/2009 11:57
Report abuse
Well someone has to pay for the Illegal soon 2B legal immigrants. That demand and recieve free housing, halal menu's, legal advice to bring 10 dependants in for schooling , doctors on NHS for lifetime illnesses that have never been treated under their Human Rights courtesy of EU.
Of course with the Set up for Regional Assemblies, information will get lost so they should get used to the meaningless care facilities now.
- Bill, Hay~Heath UK, 19/11/2009 11:51
Report abuse
Cameron (gaelic for twisted nose!!) is totally scaremongering and is talking absolute rubbish. What kind of fool would actually believe ANYTHING that comes out this Hooray Henry's motormouth??
- Janicebyrne, sussex, 19/11/2009 11:38
Report abuse
Poor old Val seeing things from afar as usual. Hasn`t the penny dropped yet Val that during the past 12 years money spent on "improving services in the public sector by Nulabour has had the following consequences. Nu Labour promise:More police on the beat = 17,000 PCSOs (status of school prefects) people dressed up to look like police officers so we are fooled into thinking the police are back on the beat. NuLabour promise: More teachers, smaller class sizes = teaching assistants by the thousands. Labour promise: Ambulance response times to be cut = Paradmedics and ambulance techinicians being replaced by emergency care assitants who cannot dispense live saving drugs, just pick you up and throw you in the ambulance and take you to hospital. Just who is going to care for the elderly in their homes, not trained staff that`s a certainty. Probably meals on wheels ops sorry thats been phased out. Private companies now doing that. No wonder Val you live in Spain. You certainly would not want to live in this country anymore, especially in old age. NuLabour have spent the money looking after the nerdowells and we are stoney broke. That`s history for you - Labour always have and always will, leave government in the red. They know no different. Its in their DNA. Labour have failed to encourage the wealth creators and have fallen overthemselves to encourage the ever expanding lower social economic group whose sole intention in life is to do as little as possible.
- Brian G, Norfolk Gorleston, 19/11/2009 11:37
Report abuse
The lamentable ignorance of Mr. Cameron.
Check the Government website and you will find that Disability Living Allowance is only paid to under 65s, at 65 years and over, people who qualify receive Attendance Allowance.
Where is it written that these benefits will be abolished?
- John Jones, Westminster, 19/11/2009 11:24
Report abuse
Another 10p tax fiasco? The man doesn't learn.
- Stephen C, London, 19/11/2009 11:06
Report abuse
David Cameron should know,when he is Prime Minister,OAPs will most certainly know the meaning of cuts.
- Marcus Simpson, London, 19/11/2009 11:00
Report abuse
All parties seem to be paying lip service to this issue for electoral expediency. I have yet to see or hear a politician who even begins to understand the reality of daily caring for an elderly bed ridden demented parent in the home. Free home care for some will help some but it will still leave the rest of us struggling. And even if the care is free that does nothing to tackle the Dickensian state of care in the home caused by the privatisation of care to external agencies.
- Janet, London, UK, 19/11/2009 10:57
Report abuse
Val, its always enlivening to read your contributions, worthy of a lbaour Head office spinmeister. The truth, always a little flakey when dealing with your government of choice is that the 600 million will mean something else gives at NHS - so what will that be? Answer from you and yours came there non. The balance will be bourne by local authorities - meaning higher council tax - we who pay tax in the UK Val (not sure you do?) are only too well aware that this is still tax and it is Labour thats raising them again.
On a lighter note don't even you find it sickening that no mention of Afghanistan was made nor that the legislation to ensure a clean parliament after the election were ommitted to try and get some narrow factional benefit?
We are watching the death throws of a very discreditable bunch who have sort to manifestly change our democrapgics and our political relationships with the EU without even the slightest regard for us The People. This alone makes them a morally bankrupt government - the decent thing would be to call a halt to this farce - but no they stay for Labour benefit not our country.
- Christian Ball, London, UK, 19/11/2009 10:48
Report abuse
"........If no one turned up to vote at the next General Election what would be the outcome?"
Perhaps the Queen would finally have to take responsibility for governing the country! Responsibility which has been progressively ceded to appease politicians by at least 4 generations of her family, just so that they can keep the family business. Her first act could be to unilaterally restore our national sovereignty.
- Sandy, Ealing, London, 19/11/2009 10:45
Report abuse
Val : "... £120 billion NHS budget .."
Is it just me or does anybody else think that there is something very wrong with that number?
Val, dress it up as you wish but the fact is, UK is broke. All very well Gordo saying to the banks that they should save during the good times and have sufficient capital. Does that not apply even more so to his lousy goverment too?
- Sarit, Hong Kong, 19/11/2009 10:35
Report abuse
I was brought up to sympathise with socialism and have been a socialist in conscience all my life. -But I fume with fury when I see where the government throws our money.- Anon Pc, above is spot-on. -I would add to this list - dubious 'disability benefit' scroungers, getting away with millions. -I do have a vested interest. -After running my own business and employing up to a dozen people at times for over thirty years, and paying all the attendant taxes etc., - when I went bust five years ago, I was entitled to job seekers allowance of about thirty-odd pounds a week (for six months) then, because my wife works, -cut off without a penny. -No help with spectacles, dental care or community charge etc.
Yet this government puffs out it's chest , and feels really proud at being so profligate towards others with 'our' money!!!
- Huggy, Cumbernauld Scotland, 19/11/2009 10:31
Report abuse
So now you know where the money's coming from. Robin Hood only robbed the rich and, not as Brown does, the sick and the elderly.
- Rs, Winchester, England, 19/11/2009 10:26
Report abuse
The very fact that David Cameron says 2 million pensioners would lose £8 billion to fund a £670 million budget shows just how stupid he thinks we all are. The funding for the personal care will come partly from the £120 billion NHS budget, and the rest from Local Authorities which have already identified savings of £120 million. What would you prefer, this government proposal or David Cameron's idea that each pensioner who can afford it should pay £8000 when they are 65 to cover their care? What about those pensioners who don't have any money? The coist for a married couple would be £16,000. This can only mean another Conservative 2 tier system. A good service for the haves, and the dregs for those who have not. Every economist and NHS expert has said £8000 will not be enough. The Tories will hope many pensioners wont live long enough to get the care they have paid for, or they will come back for more when the money runs out.
- Val Daniels, Mijas Costa, Spain, 19/11/2009 10:11
Report abuse
The worst PM this country has ever had!
- Tojo, Hythe, Kent, 19/11/2009 09:49
Report abuse
I would imagine Gordon Brown will be very happy to chuck the poison chalice of leadership next year,the guy was shafted by Blair,get on with your life Gordon and forget politics,its not important enough to lose sleep over.
- Oscar Wildebeest, Canterbury under Parr, 19/11/2009 09:39
Report abuse
It's gone way past rational thought. I can't even abide a picture of Gordon now. Waves of anger engulf me. Please. Please. Please . Go.
- Alex C, London, 19/11/2009 09:23
Report abuse
"More than two million pensioners would lose disability benefits worth an average £3,400 each under flagship Labour plans for elderly care"
Well what's new here?
For the last 13years Nu-Liebour have ruthlessly punished and despised the following:
-War heroes
-Soldiers
-Pensioners
-Hard working decent,law abiding families
-Police Officers
-Doctors
-Nurses
-Teachers
-Paramedics
-Cancer patients
Yet they have looked after and lavished hundreds of billions of pounds of OUR taxes on:
-Asylum seekers
-Illegal Immigrants
-Convicted criminals
-Lazy scroungers who don't want to work
-Jobsworth pen-pushing bureaucrats in non-jobs
It's utterly revolting the way in which this wretched sham of a banana-republic government have treated the most hardworking and decent people in our society whilst pandering to the every whim of the lowest dregs (including convicted murderers and terrorists).
Long may the parasites of Nu-Labour forever rot in the stinking political backwaters of socialist failure.
- Anon Pc, London, UK, 19/11/2009 09:21
Report abuse
If it was such a good idea why wasn`t it done by NuLabour years ago? The cost of 24 hour care in peoples` homes is extraordinarily high. Where will the trained staff come from and what about the back up necessary from local doctors. Already out of hours GP cover is basically non existent, that is why A&Es are so busy. Another one of NuLabour`s ideas that seems good on paper; but when you start looking at the praticalities of it in relation to people with high dependency care it is unfortunately a non starter. Such individuals would be better cared for in the old Cottage Hospitals; but then NuLabour has done away with them as they said bigger hospitals were better as centres of excellence etc etc. With no thought whatsoever for quality care in the community. I have been there with my mother and I know from first hand experience Gordon is talking nonsense as usual just to get a few votes. Pathetic.
- Brian G, Norfolk Gorleston, 19/11/2009 08:50
Report abuse
Stupid Question! If no one turned up to vote at the next General Election what would be the outcome?
- Pedro, Dubai UAE, 19/11/2009 08:17
Report abuse
