Lords reject government change to the adult social care cap

Members of the House of Lords voted to reject a government change to the cap on social care costs within the Health and Care Bill in the House of Lords.

The cross-party amendment to delete the part of legislation pertaining to the cap on care costs for charging purposes, which was passed 198-158.

The amendment scrapped plans that would have excluded any costs paid by councils toward adult social care from the proposed £86,000 cap.

The government will likely attempt to reinsert the measure in the House of Commons, where 19 Conservative MPs rebelled against it last time around.

Liberal Democrat Lords spokesperson for health, Baroness Sal Brinton, said: “This Conservative Government’s plans come nowhere near fulfilling Boris Johnson’s election promise on the steps of Downing Street to ‘fix’ the ongoing crisis in social care. These unfair and divisive plans will not stop people needing to sell their homes to pay for care and is yet another broken promise.

“The vote tonight shows that the Liberal Democrats and others are fighting hard for a fair and long-term solution to the social care crisis and are holding this Government to account.”

Commenting on the vote, Sally Warren, director of policy at health think tank The King’s Fund, said: “I welcome the House of Lords decision to reject the government’s planned change to the cap on social care costs. The change would leave many poorer people still exposed to the risk of having to sell their home to fund their care, whilst wealthier people would enjoy protection from the very high costs that can come with needing social care for long periods of time.

“Recent analysis from the Institute for Fiscal Studies and The Health Foundation shows that people in less affluent areas, such as parts of the North East, Yorkshire and the Humber and the Midlands, would be most disadvantaged by the change to the cap on social care costs.

“Ministers may now ask MPs to vote again on the change in a bid to overrule the House of Lords. Reinstating this regressive change would run counter to the government’s ambition to ‘level up’, as well as the promise that no-one would have to sell their home to pay for their care. I encourage members of parliament to consider whether they want to back a policy that will save the Treasury money, but at the direct expense of poorer people living in the North and Midlands who need social care.”