25 February 2025
Politicians have delayed essential changes to social care for decades. Another review isn’t the answer. Photo Kzenon/shutterstock.com.
The government intends to spend three years preparing a blueprint to overhaul England’s social care. That’s a disgrace after decades-long wrangling and the urgency of dealing with the crisis facing frail, ill and disabled people.
Labour Health Secretary Wes Streeting merely echoes previous governments in ordering yet another review, not expected to be published until 2028.
Feasible
Andrew Dilnot, author of the 2011 report on social care reform, told the parliamentary health and social care committee on 8 January that “it’s perfectly, perfectly feasible for the government…by the end of 2025, to say: ‘Actually, we know what needs to be done, this is what we’re going to do.’”
“My own view is that three years is a completely unnecessary period of time. If we simply focused on it we could get that decided very, very quickly.”
“Three years is a completely unnecessary period of time.”
Dilnot said the care challenges facing families and local authorities were “simply unacceptable in a society with the levels of income and wealth that we have. We are just not doing that well. That’s the clear and pressing, immediate, urgent task.”
For over 20 years, all parties have accepted the need for social care funding reform. Previous governments said they accepted Dilnot’s proposed changes.
Not delivering
Governments issued white and green papers, but did nothing to carry out the changes. Ministers have made repeated promises to deliver change. The problem was “just not actually delivering”.
The chief executive of the Social Care Institute for Excellence, Kathryn Smith, told MPs: “I’ve worked in social care throughout all those green and white papers, and every time one comes out you think you are going to get somewhere, and to be honest, it is just Groundhog Day.”
Rapid
Streeting denies this review is just more delay. But organisations such as the Institute for Government and The King’s Fund have challenged that – calling for more clarity and more rapid action.
Indeed, we do know what needs to be done – carry out Dilnot’s proposals.