Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

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

727 replies

mids2019 · 29/09/2026 08:14

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?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
the80sweregreat · 29/09/2026 19:21

Sesma · 29/09/2026 19:20

So what are we getting exactly, I thought, obviously wrongly it was the stint in a care home but seems it's not

I did too. It seems to pay for carers in the persons home which ( in many cases) is self funding.

YourAmplePlumPoster · 29/09/2026 19:23

Actually there's a catch. Burnham's care plan will pay for personal care but not for residential care.

Binnyforthewin · 29/09/2026 19:25

Surely he can't mean just home care not including residential care? That would be completely disingenuous. It would be like saying the NHS was free at the point of use and not including hospitals.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about these subjects:

the80sweregreat · 29/09/2026 19:26

Care homes will still be thousands a month. Nothing much will change really , but maybe carers in the home for many may be a better option as that will be funded by the government/ NHS. Lots of new jobs being opened up , I just hope it’s all been costed out properly and carers given a decent wage and so on. I’m not holding my breath, but it’s a nice vision ( unto you go into a care home and it’s all taken away from you anyway )

SquirrelSoShiny · 29/09/2026 19:30

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · 29/09/2026 17:54

We either sort this out or we accept that elderly people will no longer be offered medical care once they have cognitive decline.

So leave them to die in pain with no medical care at all? is that what you're suggesting? and who gets to decide elderly and what cognitive decline is? I mean, I can't see that being abused at all...and why just elderly people? what about other people with incurable conditions?

Must have been real pisser for you when the AD bill failed.

If nothing changes, no one will receive medical care except the ultra wealthy because the NHS will collapse. It's already running on fumes. Rant about people dying in pain if you want, people are ALREADY dying in pain because the medical system is overwhelmed. Multiple hospital beds essentially blocked by elderly people unable to go anywhere else. We either grasp this nettle like adults or I promise you the assisted dying bill will pass and people will be begging for death. There is no magic solution to our changing demographics. We either fund social care for the elderly OR we allow the health service to collapse OR we accept that elderly / disabled people will be choosing between euthanasia or a kind of Dickensian workhouse in their final months.

There is no magic wand. We have got to be an adult society and have the difficult conversations politicians have avoided for the last 40 years. It is time for the fucking fantasists and grifters to grow the fuck up. We need intelligent adults in the room now.

Advocodo · 29/09/2026 19:31

AIiswatchingyou · 29/09/2026 08:33

It would take far more than the triple lock.

As OP states it is unfair to expect those who are poorer, and much more likely to die earlier to subsidise those who are richer and much more likely to live longer lives.

Add to this it's the poorer members of society who will actually be doing the social care - and they will not be paid well for it.

So it's a double whammy for the poor - hard, poorly paid work leading to health problems earlier in life (muscoskeletal etc.) and likely a shorter period benefitting from retirement. These people would have had funded social care anyway because they are unlikely to have significant wealth.

For the wealthy, they get someone to look after their parents, grandparents, great grandparents - who isn't them of course, because they do jobs that are less likely to cause health issues. They then get someone else to fund the care, despite their elders having more than enough money to fund it themselves and then - fantastic, they get to reap the unearned inheritance that has been saved by them not having to pay for the care their parents took.

It is unfair, it is not in the interests of working people.

Instead the pay your way model needs to stay - and in fact, NI needs to be paid into older age, winter fuel needs limiting and triple lock needs to go.

I can’t understand why NI contributions from older people too isn’t being suggested by the media. It makes so much sense to me.

Cyclebabble · 29/09/2026 19:34

Itchthescratch · 29/09/2026 16:59

12% of pensioners rely solely on the state pension. Most that benefit from the triple lock will have a higher level of income than working households when housing is accounted for.

Agreed. I am.pleased with today's announcement which keeps a link to earnings.

BorgQueen · 29/09/2026 19:34

I’ll criticise whoever I like thanks.
It’s abhorrent that lone Male carers are going into vulnerable elderly Womens’ homes, even more so when the lady in question was blind, like my 96 year old neighbour.
It may well be that there are decent Male carers but I wouldn’t want one looking after me or any other vulnerable Female in frail health, especially one on a visa from Nigeria or god knows where who may or may not even be qualified.
Not all Men but enough of them.

When sexual assault is rife in hospitals,
why would you take that risk in your iwn home?

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · 29/09/2026 19:35

OR we allow the health service to collapse OR we accept that elderly / disabled people will be choosing between euthanasia or a kind of Dickensian workhouse in their final months.

Some people on here would get quite excited at the thought of that for the old. I wondered how long it would be before workhouses got a mention.

Workhouses were also for the idle able bodied. We'd need quite a lot of them in that case.

https://historicengland.org.uk/research/inclusive-heritage/disability-history/1832-1914/the-changing-face-of-the-workhouse/

BIossomtoes · 29/09/2026 19:46

Raiderofthelostbattenburg · 29/09/2026 19:14

But fixing that is literally at the core of his plan. They're going to introduce a legally binding social care pay scale across England (like how there are pay scales in the NHS), so, private agencies will legally have to pay workers based on their skills and qualifications, rather than keeping them on low wages. In principle, the plans honestly are very, very good. I guess the question for me is whether the Prime Minister can actually pull it off - especially when we live in such cynical, politically divided times.

If he doesn’t pull it off it won’t be for the lack of trying. He’s risking everything on it.

Binnyforthewin · 29/09/2026 19:51

It will be interesting to see if there is any new care or whether it simply about how to spread the funding of existing care. Given that currently it is the welathy who lose their assets and those with no assets pay nothing very little, changing so that everyone contributes more evenly feels quite regressive.

Raiderofthelostbattenburg · 29/09/2026 19:52

Badbadbunny · 29/09/2026 19:18

But if the firms can't make money, i.e. costs increase due to higher wages, but no facility to charge more, then they'll withdraw from the market and there'll be fewer care places.

Just look at NHS dentistry - it's becoming impossible to make the kind of profit the dentists/practice owners want from NHS work, so they're stopping NHS work and going private. Likewise GPs are doing the same, i.e. reducing NHS work and doing more private/locum work.

I think it'll only work if local councils start making their own provisions again, i.e. building care homes, convalescent homes, etc, like they always used to.

I agree there are going to be real challenges, but after successive governments have kicked this into the long grass I think it’s incredible we have a Prime Minister who is prepared to spend so much political capital actually trying.

SquirrelSoShiny · 29/09/2026 19:55

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · 29/09/2026 19:35

OR we allow the health service to collapse OR we accept that elderly / disabled people will be choosing between euthanasia or a kind of Dickensian workhouse in their final months.

Some people on here would get quite excited at the thought of that for the old. I wondered how long it would be before workhouses got a mention.

Workhouses were also for the idle able bodied. We'd need quite a lot of them in that case.

https://historicengland.org.uk/research/inclusive-heritage/disability-history/1832-1914/the-changing-face-of-the-workhouse/

Froth to your heart's content if it makes you feel morally superior. Your snipes and hand wringing don't change a thing. There is no money tree and no magic wand. We either find solutions or we watch our health system collapse. If it makes you feel any better, I write all this knowing that I am one of the people who will likely be looking down the barrel of this particular gun myself.

Allseeingallknowing · 29/09/2026 19:57

YourAmplePlumPoster · 29/09/2026 19:23

Actually there's a catch. Burnham's care plan will pay for personal care but not for residential care.

He did say that people would still be able to keep their assets

SquirrelSoShiny · 29/09/2026 19:57

BIossomtoes · 29/09/2026 19:46

If he doesn’t pull it off it won’t be for the lack of trying. He’s risking everything on it.

Yes I truly admire him for this. I just hope the British population lives up to the faith he is putting in us. He needs us to be the adults in the room now.

NorthXNorthWest · 29/09/2026 19:58

Raiderofthelostbattenburg · 29/09/2026 15:41

But the thing is, what I’m starting to realise is you can’t begin to get to anything of substance until you’ve had the frank conversations. We’ve had too much sound bite politics, and far too many announcements that sound tough or substantive but are based on flimsy evidence and therefore make for bad policy in the end, because politicians haven’t been honest enough about how the costs and benefits weigh up.

Whatever you think of Andy Burnham ideologically (and I’m not somebody who votes Labour no matter what) - at least it feels like we finally have a proper politician back in charge.

Sadly, a proper politician who rides into power Brutus-style, uncontested, then thanks Caesar for the opportunity...

He brings “hope and unity”. Are we supposed to forget the very recent divisive North v South rhetoric, or the contempt shown for workers earning over £45k? Elderly homeowners? People who send their children to private school?

Then comes the absolutely extraordinary contradiction on aspiration.

The burden of student loans. A hopeful pause...a solution at last? Burnham acknowledges how unfair they are and that young people need help... His solution? Easier access to yet more cheap debt to buy a home (we all know how that will go when interest rates rise) because not everyone has the “Bank of Mum and Dad”.

Yet almost in the same breath, he tells the moving story of his grandmother: a woman who worked hard, bought her own home and wanted to leave it to her children. He thought it was wrong that she had to sell it to pay for her care.

So which is it?

Was his grandmother's desire to pass the fruits of her work to her children admirable working-class aspiration, or is the Bank of Mum and Dad an inequality government needs to correct? I would genuinely love to know. And if she were alive today, would the fruits of the much respected and appreciated work ethic that allowed her to buy that same house be dismissed as “unearned wealth” and potentially subjected to further property taxes?

You can't celebrate your own grandmother's attempt to pass something on to her children, then treat other parents succeeding in doing exactly that as part of the problem. But maybe this is where the growing sense of entitlement to other people's assets comes from. The welfare state was created to provide a safety net, not to guarantee equal inheritances and equal retirements. His father missed out on the Bank of Mum and Dad, so AB and Labour have decided that those who have worked and saved to have more than the minimum can be the "Bank of Mum and Dad" for random strangers who want to avail themselves of free social care and any other free stuff that the government should be providing through normal taxation and growing the economy.

Working-class aspiration apparently deserves celebrating until it succeeds. Then you tax it until it knows its place.

And, of course, the rot is all down to the Conservatives.

It was also so refreshing and unexpected to hear that crude cuts were not the answer.🙄

All aboard the gravy train...

Plus ça change.

BIossomtoes · 29/09/2026 19:58

SquirrelSoShiny · 29/09/2026 19:57

Yes I truly admire him for this. I just hope the British population lives up to the faith he is putting in us. He needs us to be the adults in the room now.

Couldn’t agree more.

the80sweregreat · 29/09/2026 19:59

I feel the PM has a bit of a rosy view of carers and care work in general despite his own personal experience with his late dad. Care in the home is a tough job. People need to be trained well and be able to do the job competently. Unfortunately that can be patchy.
Not to mention the cost of it all. Agencies will rinse the government for money and contracts and then not be too bothered if they can’t deliver. I can see it becoming an area for making the owners a bit richer and the ones doing the actual work not that well off. Sorry to be cynical, but loads to be ironed out and it’s complex.

jesseK · 29/09/2026 20:00

The triple lock is painted as some wonderful thing. I live wholly on the state pension so will get about £40 a month extra and I'm sure my council tax will increase more than that next year, as well as rises in utility bills. food, petrol etc. I already pay a quarter of my pension just on council tax.

Pepperlee · 29/09/2026 20:00

the80sweregreat · 29/09/2026 18:12

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.

I was a home help in the 80s and early 90s until I left to be a .mobile warden. It was a lifeline to those who couldn't do much or get out. We were based locally too but then privatisation came in and things changed drastically. Private companies set up and their workers were travelling all over the place and were having to rush jobs to get to the next one. The personal touch went out of the window and personal care was the only thing carers did with a sandwich maybe for lunch. No more shopping , cleaning or fetching a PX or having a cup of tea and a natter. Most homes were run by the LA too until private homes sprang up everywhere. Now very few homes are LA led. Hardly any really. A spanking shiny new home opened near me but didn't last long as the owners got an offer for the land and that was soon shut down. Times have changed but not for the better.

Binnyforthewin · 29/09/2026 20:03

the80sweregreat · 29/09/2026 19:59

I feel the PM has a bit of a rosy view of carers and care work in general despite his own personal experience with his late dad. Care in the home is a tough job. People need to be trained well and be able to do the job competently. Unfortunately that can be patchy.
Not to mention the cost of it all. Agencies will rinse the government for money and contracts and then not be too bothered if they can’t deliver. I can see it becoming an area for making the owners a bit richer and the ones doing the actual work not that well off. Sorry to be cynical, but loads to be ironed out and it’s complex.

I think understand the plan is to nationalise care - not outsource it all to agencies.

the80sweregreat · 29/09/2026 20:07

Right. So the care will come under the NHS umbrella. It’s a nice idea, but the NHS is woeful for many people , will doing this be any better ? I like to think that it might work, but it’ll take a lot of money work and effort.

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · 29/09/2026 20:09

Froth to your heart's content if it makes you feel morally superior.

it's not hard to feel morally superior to someone seriously suggesting taking away medical care from dementia patients and workhouses for the old.

There is no money tree and no magic wand.

And how far do you think 15 billion in taking away the triple lock will go? that's about three weeks funding for the NHS.

Raiderofthelostbattenburg · 29/09/2026 20:11

the80sweregreat · 29/09/2026 20:07

Right. So the care will come under the NHS umbrella. It’s a nice idea, but the NHS is woeful for many people , will doing this be any better ? I like to think that it might work, but it’ll take a lot of money work and effort.

The idea is that having a national care service alongside the NHS will relieve pressure on the NHS - at the moment the fact that social care is so bad costs the NHS a lot of money.

hyggetyggedotorg · 29/09/2026 20:12

frozendaisy · 29/09/2026 08:27

Pensions will rise with inflation, I would guess, which might mean some years it will rise with the triple lock rate.

So this alone won’t fund social care.

This is so badly thought out, once social care is free the demand will be so great that it will be a two tier system, but like private health care, or nursery there will be those lucky ones that get the free spaces, but additional extras, and expensive luxury care homes will still be funded privately. It will be a mess.

There will also be a 10% death tax on all estates. And there still won’t be enough money or resources.

But it will get rid of the triple lock.

Once social care is free you think the demand will be higher?

Do you really imagine people wanting to have strangers in each day to shower & feed them just because it’s free?

Swipe left for the next trending thread