Labour ditches social care reforms to save money. Pensioners to pay more for care!

 

Labour's honey moon period with the British electorate is now over. It looks like the elderly in Britain and those in receipt of state benefits, are going to get shafted under Labour and Sir Keir Starmer-oid.

Most of my mother's life savings were spent on her residential care costs in just under three years. She was a 'self-funder' and paid for her own care costs and the care of others. It's generally acknowledged that self-funders pay higher care fees to subsidise those residents funded by the local authority. After a life time of working, saving and paying her taxes, she was penalised for being prudent and thrifty because of 'means-testing' and received no help with her care costs from the local authority or the NHS. She would only have been entitled to financial help with her care costs if she had qualified for NHS continuous health care funding or had savings of less than £23,250.

Under social care reforms introduced by the previous Conservative government, next October 2025, the £23,250 threshold for getting council support to pay for care cost, was going to be raised to £100,000 and after spending £86,000 on their care, people would've had their care costs paid by the local authority. Both these measures have now been scrapped by Labour's austerity Chancellor Rachel Reeves, who says that scrapping the reform will save £1bn by the end of next year. Reeves has already announced that many old age pensioners are going to lose their winter fuel allowance. Only older people on Pension Credit and means tested benefits will now get help with paying for their fuel bills.

I wouldn't be surprised if the email Inbox of Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister and MP for Ashton-under-Lyne, isn't already full with complaints from irate pensioners who have had their pockets pinched. Like Fagin, in the musical ‘Oliver’, Reeves believes that ‘You’ve Got to Pick a Pocket or Two.”

All three Tameside MPs, are now on the front bench. Many older people were hoping for some relief from sky high care bills but ditching the cap, could now lead to people paying extremely high social care costs, running into hundreds of thousands of pounds. Some will lose their homes and life savings. In opposition, Labour's manifesto did not commit to a date for introducing the cap, but Labour's shadow health secretary, Wes Streeting, said his party would introduce the spending cap if it won the general election. Labour has now reneged on that promise but as we know, there's no pledge or promise that Starmer-oid won't ditch as and when it suits him.

In previous interviews, Reeves has said that Labour is not the party of people on state benefits. When she was shadow work and pensions secretary, Reeves vowed to be tougher than the Tories when it came to slashing the benefits bill and she said the unemployed would not be able to "linger on benefits."

If Labour is serious about filling a financial black hole left by the Tories, they could start by taking measures to close tax loopholes that allow corporations like Amazon and Starbucks to pay very little tax on massive European profits. Amazon had sales income of €44bn in 2020, but paid no corporation tax. And what about increasing taxes on the wealthy? Similarly, some people do wonder why the British taxpayer is subsiding the food and drink bill in the House of Commons and the rent, food and energy bills of MPs, who receive an annual salary of £91,346 plus expenses.