The first reading on User-led Social Care commenced with James Murray as a Member of Parliament for Ealing North on 5th February 2020.
Murray, who is a British Labour Co-operative politician and only recently elected since the 2019 General Election took to the stand at the House of Lords to talk candidly about the social care crisis and impact on those who need the services and those who are employed in the sector.
Murray said:
“Social care is in crisis. Some 1.5 million people over the age of 65 do not get the social care they need. More than a third of people who receive local authority-funded care or support have to purchase additional support themselves. In fact, over the past two years nearly 10,000 people have had to approach their local authority for help after running out of money. That is the result of the Government’s deep cuts to public services since 2012, with a total of £7.7 billion taken out of social care budgets.”
Due to the crisis, councils have been forced to narrow the eligibility criteria for social care meaning many of those in need of social care are denied the support and help they desperately require. Murray continued to say that care workers are “are far too often undervalued, underpaid and overworked.”
He continued:
“Our social care system is in urgent need of proper funding and a system that no longer incentivises a race to the bottom on quality and on workforce conditions, which is why, on 16 January, after giving my maiden speech, I voted to ensure that health and social care are properly funded, with an additional £26 billion in real terms. This extra funding is vital to support the social care system that we need.”
Murray talked about his experience in Ealing revealing that councils could make a difference if they had proper support from national government and announced several points to the Minister. He said:
“First, there should be a right of first refusal for social workers to step in and take over failing private organisations that provide social care. At the moment, when private organisations face financial difficulties, they are often sold on to another private organisation or simply closed down. Where private organisations are failing, employees should have an opportunity to take on all or part of that organisation.”
He added:
“Secondly, we need protection against asset stripping. Mutualised social care services should be asset-locked, to ensure that assets of all types are locked within the organisation, which is crucial to preventing asset stripping or demutualisation. Thirdly, we need regulation to support co-operative models over for-profit ones. Currently, all non-state providers are categorised as independent, which undermines the ability of care users and their families to distinguish between for-profit and not-for- profit providers.
He ended:
“These steps by national Government would help support co-operative approaches to social care, putting the people who need social care, their families and their care workers at the heart of decisions about how social care is provided. We must stop allowing private companies to profiteer while those who rely on social care, and the workers who provide it, pay the price.
The Minister for Care, Caroline Dinenage commended and acknowledged user-led organisations, carers, care professional and the many amazing unpaid care workers who are employed in adult social care. She continued by saying that it is important to recognise that the sector “….is under enormous pressure, but she continues to say “….he is wrong to say that this is new or the result of Government cuts. Unfortunately, I am a very elderly lady—he has the benefit of being a lot younger—and I can recall successive Governments over past decades wrestling with how to fund adult social care.”
Jim McMahon, a member of parliament for Oldham West and Royton retaliated with a response to the Minister for Care. He said:
“Surely the Minister recognises that, notwithstanding our need for a long-term, cross-party solution to this issue, it is a fact that more than 1 million people who do not receive care today would have been entitled to care in 2010.”
But Dinenage disagreed with the statement and found the facts to be “a little misleading” citing “….the Age UK fact that 1.4 million people out there have unmet care needs. In fact, that is a little misleading, because it suggests to me that there are people out there whose care needs are not being met at all. A large number of those people are actually self-funding.”
