Andy B’s speech

The usual waffly soundbites from him. 🤷‍♀️

Also when it comes to the EU, again, I am as anti Brexit as they come but what I want is a competent Government who tells the population that the EU relationship will always be something that is continuously negotiated aka the truth if you are not a fully paid up member. And that is where we find ourselves, we have to negotiate a mutually beneficial arrangement. The EU isn’t doing too well without us either. They know that, we know that, they have more power, we are all better off together.

And it is the same point with the mansion tax by the way - it is just going to destroy wealth and value and any economic realist knows this. But Andy cannot cancel that even if it makes zero sense because then his own party will turn on him. And there we have it, the ideology will ultimately trump no matter how smart Andy turns out to be in navigating both what is good for the country as a whole and as many people in it and his own naval gazing party.

I don’t think it is speculation to say the number don’t add up and they will likely require cross subsidy over and above the already very progressive tax system we have and that they are likely to use deterrents accordingly to get people to subsidise.

It isn’t clear at all. You’re speculating just like the rest of us.

I haven’t.

And it is pretty clear that if you opt out and want a “naice” care home with others paying 8-9k a month a Labour government is going to penalise you for not subsidising with VAT. Just like they have done for private education.

I suspect the honest truth is if you have a 7k a month pension post tax that is what they are going to expect you to contribute. Which isn’t abnormal by European standards. But it is further subsidising.

Well Andy promised to be HONEST, so let’s have it.

Don't get your knickers in a twist!

You’re absolutely right. And my speculation is as valid as yours. You’re the one calling it “a bit shit” on no evidence whatsoever. 🤷‍♀️

You're just making it up. You state guesses for the future as if they are fact. Ultimately no one know what will and won't be covered, how much it will cost and how it will be paid for.

No. Try reading. The care element in care homes will be covered. As will care at home at its current levels which tend to be a maximum of four visits a day. Vanishingly few people pay for 24/7 care at home now because it’s almost double the price of a care home. It’s a bit less shit than no free care for anyone with assets over £23.5k as it is now.

It is far better to give people reasonable figures from the outset that they should have in their pension so they can plan ahead for the care home needs. Just like it is far better to tell young people how many hours they need to work to have a decent living wage and get on the housing ladder.
At the end of the day, the State should be encouraging all to work as much as possible, save in a reasonable way and helping everyone to achieve this not by babyfying and paying for them, but giving them the tools to access housing, childcare, understand finance and pensions.

OK well state boarding school fees for the boarding element alone are running at £20000 per year and rising and that is term time only and dorm sharing etc so it’s pretty much guaranteed that 365 days of care home accommodation and living costs will be well in excess of that especially given rising energy and food cost prices. Once you start computing it, 3k a month sounds very reasonable.

So you're now saying the NCS will only cover care at home and only X hours a day. Doesn't sound like the revolutionary policy that people were looking for - your version sounds a bit shit. Hopefully Andy will aspire for better.

For the same reason people who can afford it choose private healthcare or education. Essentially choice. And I very much doubt 24/7 home care would be free, anyone needing that would need to go into a care home unless they paid for it.

Why will they continue to do so if personal care will be free?

I think they will have to do something so that accommodation costs aren't £3k a month. They will have to set up council or not for profit care homes through churches or charities. Why is accommodation costing that much? It's shared accommodation with mass catered food. The care is paid for. It must be profiteering from care home providers, which needs to be more heavily regulated.

A Lib Dem type national care programme would give people more choice not less. A Labour type may well whack on a 20 per cent VAT penalty if you choose to go private instead and not opt in to their system. And therein lies a very key difference and I want to know which one Andy intends to implement.

I think it is fair enough to ask whether it will give the vast majority of people more rights/freedoms to have a national care plan. Or whether it will curtail people’s rights and freedoms, especially those who are funding society disproportionally already via highest rates of taxation. That seems to be the eternal question these days. Progressive taxation and good forms of nationalisation should be allowing everyone greater freedoms if properly and well implemented.

Only a very small number of people get 24 hour care at home. The criteria is that it must be a medical need rather than a social need.

This is funny.
Under the NCS you will get free care in your home. This will keep people in their home longer. But like any public service you can always not use it and go private.
Just like no one is forcing you to send your kids to state school instead of private.

How do you work that one out? It won’t be compulsory to use the NCS any more than it is to use the NHS. People who choose to pay a small fortune for 24/7 care at home now will continue to do so.

So he want to force people out of their homes into care homes. Then Burnham can make them sell the house. Makes sense.