Is ending the triple lock to fund a care service fair....

[mids2019]

To me this is actually not a hugely left wing proposal as middle classes with occupational and private pensions will not notice the reduced increases in state pension significantly.

However poorer pensioners with little other pension provision may be impacted a lot to essentially fund a care service that will be disprotioanrly help the middle classes as their life expectancy is greater.

Is it fair that our poorest pensioners get less to support a care service which would mean a millionaire pensioner would not nèed to sell their assets to access it?

How do you know it’s only for care in your own home? Who told you that? Your post describes the current situation, you know the one Burnham passionately wants to change.

ETA If this was really what he had in mind he was pretty bloody stupid to launch it in a care home and reference his dad who lived in one.

Yes, unfortunately it does.

I know someone whose relative pays jusy shy of 8k a month and she said the care is fairly basic and not that great most of the time. Of course politicians don’t want assisted dying as most of them have shares in the posher ones and many do make profits. Yet something else hived off and god forbid you have dementia, you are treated like a second class citizen.

MN is ageist as fuck. It's like it's not going to happen to them one day.

If there was more support for families to help their relatives at a home, a lot of this wouldn't be needed. Attendance allowance doesn't even cover a daily visit-could you imagine if free nursery was less than one hour a day?
It's very hard for those of us who work and have kids to support family-maybe allocating more for this would avoid the issue in the first place, but money shouldn't be taken from those who have worked hard. It's not their fault there's not enough jobs for young people.

Maybe it will turn out to be an own goal. But don’t you think it’s incredible to have a politician who is prepared to stake their career on actually doing something they believe is right for the long term good of the country?

Not long ago, weren’t people trying to attack Andy Burnham as a people pleaser who was too desperate to be liked to do anything big or difficult? That attack line crumbled quickly in the face of reality, didn’t it?

Economists and economic think tanks right across the political spectrum have long argued it was necessary to look again at the triple lock, because it is not affordable, but none of them seemed to think a politician would be brave enough to try it. Well, now one is.

It’s just been on BBC news about Care homes not being covered

They’ll get mine. And I’ll use my bus pass as ID at the polling station.

Economists and economic think tanks right across the political spectrum have long argued it was necessary to look again at the triple lock

Are they looking at anything else as not affordable or is the triple lock so infinitely elastic that abolishing it will solve all our debt problems?

And what's going to replace it? because that will cost money as well, and no doubt set off a wave of complaining across MN.

I support this. They are talking about carers in your own home which people did not used to pay for, but do now.

I imagine that many people will think it’s for the cost of a care home. So nothing really has changed. Carers in your home tend to be cheaper overall , but it’ll still be loads of money for governments to find on top of the cost of the NHS.

Years ago the council had ‘ home helps’ people who would go into people’s homes for half a day to cook and clean and generally be an enormous help.
You’re lucky to get half an hour and a microwave meal these days, unless you’re self funding and can afford an hour a day or more.
More things that changed for the worst.

Historically employers did not have to arrange for staff to join a pension scheme, and even when there was one available, staff had the option whether or not to join it and the government set up its own called SERPS (State Earnings Related Pension) compulsory for staff not in a private pension scheme, which meant that dependent on their earnings an additional amount was added to their basic state pension, which in effect now bars some people from qualifying for Pension Credit, Free tv licenses, some Energy support and free dental treatment. As does having a certain level of savings. Plus as women we have had to work well beyond age 60 before receiving our full state pension. There were no free child care options apart from 15 hours per week Nursery care for children age 3 plus, we had to pay childminders and nurseries in order to go to work, and use all our annual leave to cover school holidays. So yes I think we are definitely entitled to the triple lock and people who can afford it should pay for their own care in old age. Attendance allowance and PIP are not means tested or taxable so these can be claimed to help fund it when necessary.

They're probably not expecting to be in power by 2030, so they can say whatever they like.

Once it becomes clear it’s not for the cost of an actual care home the press will tear it to shreds.
Many people start off with carers coming to the house , but it often doesn’t work that well and isn’t overnight.
It’ll still cost loads as well. It’s a nice idea, but doesn’t really solve much and there is still a recruiting problem as many don’t pay that well and you need to be able to run a reliable car to get around between visits.
i know a few people who have tried these jobs and found it to be hard going , low paid and your not treated that well. That will also need to be fixed or looked into as well.

care homes will still require funding.
that will scupper them surely. the community carer will be in even more demand

A much needed brave move AB.

After my DM with COVID induced paranoia and then a dementia diagnosis, paying £6,500 per month for her care, totalling £305,500 over just under 4 years, something has to change.

The absolute horror of sitting in meetings, requesting the Continuing Care Package Funding, having it turned down, appealed, agreed for 6 months and revoked as she ‘wasn’t ill enough’ having us sit through being told she was healthy and eating well (a 6 stone woman who had been a size 18), so wasn’t ill (she died 11 days afterwards the funding was revoked). The whole system needs to change.

The National Health Care Service must also be in place so that shareholders and CEO’s of private companies are not benefitting (as they do now).

My DM & DF worked hard and deserved great care at the end of their lives. Funding this themselves gave them more choice but they shouldn’t have had to.

Yes, my pension will not rise as much, but goodness it is worth the small sacrifice.

@ChubbyCheeksCharlie

You need to be downsizing to a 1.3-1.5m plus house to pay that much stamp duty

I bet that those with a dementia diagnosis will still be treated differently to those with other diseases.
I can’t see that changing and getting any kind of CHC is practically impossible for so many people.

my dm has the state pension, her own home, which needs upkeep,
a miniscule private pension as at 91 many women did not consider one.
a recent consideration of care reared its head, she baulked at the cost and hoped i would step in, being 30 years younger, i still work and have 6 more years to go.

This is a refreshing post!

I see this as nothing more than optics rather than of value.

The right wing Tories and Reform are seen as pandering to pensioners and get a lot of Boomer votes. The triple lock is forever mentioned by the media and merely tinkering around the edges of the actual poor state of the UK and what needs to be done (reduce spending drastically).

My assumption is that Labour are doing this to appeal to the youth vote by taking something from ‘those horrid boomers’. A vote they want that they’re also losing to the Greens.

The UK is in a sorry state. Pathetic really.

I don’t want to pay 20k plus to ‘downsize’ ( my house isn’t that big to start with!)
I guess it may happen one day , but the cost of moving is a barrier ( amongst other things)
I am lucky to have one home I know , but why people don’t move is mostly because of cost.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that this doesn't work financially.

The reason why care is currently so rationed is because it's incredibly expensive. Even if you take away all profit and ran it efficiently, it is eye wateringly expensive.

One in seven people need care that costs more than £100k in total.

This will not be funded by the state pension not rising by as much as it is meant to under the triple lock. How much are you thinking this will save over person each year versus the £100k we need to fund the care for quite a significant proportion of the population.

When my mum lost her Winter fuel allowance, I gave her the equivalent amount myself to help her get through the Winter. If the triple lock goes and she is short as a result, I will make up the difference myself.

I’d prefer to do this than have endless tax rises that eat more and more into my disposable income and which never seemed to result in any improvement to public services.