The Tory #CareTax proposals

The 2017 Conservative Manifesto has promised "Dignity and protection in old age through the right long-term solution for elderly care" if they are returned to power. They are proposing three measures:

• First, we will align the future basis for means-testing for domiciliary care with that for residential care, so that people are looked after in the place that is best for them. This will mean that the value of the family home will be taken into account along with other assets and income, whether care is provided at home, or in a residential or nursing care home.
• Second, to ensure this is fair, we will introduce a single capital floor, set at £100,000,more than four times the current means test threshold. This will ensure that, no matter how large the cost of care turns out to be, people will always retain at least £100,000 of their savings and assets, including value in the family home.
• Third, we will extend the current freedom to defer payments for residential care to those receiving care at home, so no-one will have to sell their home in their lifetime to pay for care.

Hitherto, older people who have worked all their lives and managed to become home owners through paying into a mortgage of some kind, could rest easy that their efforts would be passed on to their offspring (or whomever). And if they happened to need some care at home, they knew their own home was not at risk. If the Tories are elected to government, everyone who owns a home would know their behest is at risk: because no one can know whether they will eventually need long term domiciliary care. 

No longer would many older people have the comfort of knowing that their capital asset would maybe help their son or daughter or their grandchildren to buy a home for the first time. For many older people, this is really, really important and helps to make them feel worthwhile. The Tories are threatening to take this comfort away. Indeed I have already seen one tweet this morning from someone saying that they explored the Dignitas site for the first time in response to the manifesto. I really worry that some older people will make the decision to end their own lives rather than see their hard earned assets be whittled away by this policy. 

There are many, many reasons why this policy is very unfair and punitive. And it will ultimately result in more people gaming the system (but that is for another blog...) What I want to focus on here is how would it actually work in practice? Here some questions that I would like to have answers to:

1. The proposal refers to the value of the family home. How will that value be determined? 
2. Will measures be put in place to prevent people from putting their homes into trust to avoid this tax?
3. Will this only apply to older people, or all people who need help at home such as people with disabilities?
4. How old is old? Pension age or younger? Or older?
5. Given the massive financial consequences, who will adjudicate on whether someone has health needs (paid for free by the NHS) or social care needs (subjected to surrender of their home asset)? Will such decisions be open to legal challenge?
6. How much will this policy cost to administer?
7. Will the process of releasing the equity on the homes in question be outsourced to private financial institutions? Will they charge fees and interest?
8. What happens if the person needing such care has a partner/spouse who also owns the property? Will the legal status of this ownership (tenants in common vs joint tenancy) make any kind of difference?
9. What legal instrument will be used to extract the monies after the death of the person who needed social care? Will the government expect to put a charge on the house? What happens if the person concerned refuses to sign their home over to the government? Will they be compelled to?
10. Will this policy apply to family members who do not own the family home but live in it? In other words, will it impact on social care support for younger people (perhaps with disabilities) still living with their carers/parents?
11. If a family home would be taken into account for these purposes, will that revision of the basis of means-testing eventually be made to apply in other circumstances as well? Is this the beginning of a very large wedge of policies that will mean the state seizing more and more privately owned assets?

I am sure there are many more and more critical questions that need to be asked and answered about this policy. We need to know now so that people can make their own decision on how to vote on June 8 and before. 

Does this policy feel like one that is making the country fairer to you? I know my answer to that: no!

Fostering in Bucks: time to rattle some cages!

We all know that County Councils up and down the country are facing a crisis of significant proportions around finding and indeed paying for social care - be it social care for vulnerable adults, older people or children/young people who are now being looked after by the state.

Buckinghamshire County Council is no exception. It has statutory responsibilities to care for 'looked after children'. The most recent Buckinghamshire Safeguarding Children Board Annual Report (2015-16) has the following information:

Children Looked After

Our rates of children looked after have become more comparable to our statistical neighbours over the last few years, but remain lower than rates for the South East or national. Given the relative prosperity of Buckinghamshire compared to other areas, this is to be expected.

At March 2016, 463 children were being looked after by the local authority. Of this number:

• 52% lived outside the local authority area and 57% were placed further than 20 miles from home. 83 lived in residential care. This figure remains high compared to other areas;

• 195 lived with an agency foster carer and 83 with a Local Authority foster carer;

• 7 were in independent living; 

• 24 lived with parents;

• In the last 12 months there have been 38 adoptions - an increase from 30 adoptions in2014/15

The County Council has been seeking to increase the number of foster carers for some years. I would expect that this is driven by concern for the well being of the children themselves as well as the fact that foster caring is considerably cheaper that residential care (extracted from here 2012/13 figures):

• a council foster care placement was in the range of £23,000 to £27,000, compared with a range of £41,000 to £42,000 for a placement with other providers.
• a council residential care placement was in the range of £129,000 to £215,000 (compared with a range of £122,000 to £200,000 in a voluntary, private or independent home)

So I think we can all agree, that foster care for Looked After Children is better than residential care. (Though not in all cases, of course). The challenge then becomes one of recruiting and keeping adults prepared to foster children.

How is Bucks doing, given that this is one of their priorities. We might hope, rather well... but is it? So from the same BSCB report above we discover that "20 new foster carers were identified this year (a reduction from the 30 identified last year). However, 19 stopped being foster carers within the same time frame". So that is a net gain of one.

The report goes onto to say:

Private fostering is when a child under the age of 16 (under 18 if disabled) is cared for by someone who is not their parent or a ‘close relative’. This is a private arrangement made between a parent and a carer, for 28 days or more. In such situations the Local Authority must be notified so that they can check on the suitability of the placements and ensure other advice and support is provided.

During the last 12 months, the Local Authority has undertaken considerable work to increase awareness around private fostering, but this has not had a significant impact on the number of private fostering notifications [my added emphasis]

And with what result from all this work? One extra foster carer over the course of the year. It doesn't point to a great deal of success...

But there is good success elsewhere and plenty that is know about what it takes to run successful foster carer recruitment campaigns. For example the Social Care Institute for Excellence has this information:

Successful campaigns are likely to have the following features:

• good knowledge of the local area
• close collaboration with experienced carers
• systems in place for following up enquiries
• use of the local media
• ongoing recruitment drives.

A majority of foster carers were attracted to fostering because they had spoken to existing foster carers, seen or heard a description about fostering in the local media or both. Foster carers thought that if they played more of a central role in recruitment they could address commonly held public fears and stereotypes about fostering and social work.

Higher levels of pay is also an important factor that can influence recruitment levels. One foster carer in a consultation group said:
'We might not do it for the money, but I wouldn’t do it without the money.'

Fostering Network (www.fostering.net) takes the view that no one should be out of pocket as a result of fostering. Each year, the Fostering Network produces a minimum recommended fostering allowance and a survey, which keeps track of the allowances paid by fostering services throughout the UK.

Have you seen any evidence of this in Buckinghamshire? Do you get the impression that the County Council says recruiting foster carers is a priority but isn't doing very much that is visible about this apart from putting up the odd poster in a library...?

There is this website: http://www.buckscc.gov.uk/services/care-for-children-and-families/fostering/becoming-a-foster-carer/

True...

So I searched on > recruiting foster carers buckinghamshire strategy < and found this: https://democracy.buckscc.gov.uk/documents/s85538/Buckinghamshire%20Looked%20After%20Children%20Strategy.pdf

It is an illuminating report, not quite a year old. It says:

The number of foster carers provided by the Council’s fostering service has remained the same in the last four years. The recruitment of foster carers in Buckinghamshire is extremely challenging. There was only one fostering enquiry per thousand households in 2013/14. Most comparator authorities have twice as many enquiries. 

Whilst recent Council investment in marketing has driven a 25% increase in fostering enquiries in 2014/15, with a doubling of the numbers of people receiving an initial visit and subsequently being assessed, the impact of this on increasing the numbers of foster carers needs to be evaluated to decide where the in house recruitment should focus future activities. The loss of foster carers, through retirement or other factors means that the net gain in available carers is very small.[my added emphases]

In other words, not much is being achieved...

Later on the document reports on this action:

Increase the number of local foster care placements through a radical
partnership with fostering providers.

A radical partnership! Hmm. Sounds good. So I googled to find more. All I have found is this (https://democracy.buckscc.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=85542) which is a report some three months later, listing the same set of actions...

I just get the overwhelming impression that Bucks County Council are great at talking and fluffing their limited successes. But when you drill down, the results are just not really there.

This needs to change! 

We need more people prepared to rattle the ruling administration and push for the fine words to be turned into action and thence robust results. In short, please vote for me & Robin so that we can rattle a few cages! And in this instance, roll up our sleeves, and see what can be done about increasing the numbers of foster carers.

Just a man, standing in front of you, asking for your vote...

From today onwards, postal votes will be landing on people’s doormats. So here is my request to you and everyone in ‘Buckingham East’ to vote for me to represent you at the County Council.

In summary: while Warren, the existing Councillor, has worked hard and done a good job… I believe I can and will do better. Here are the main reasons why:

The demands on the County Council are growing while resources are getting tighter and tighter. I have spent nearly all of my working life advising local councils and the police on how to get ‘more for less’, how to squeeze out more results with fewer pounds. So I bring a unique set of skills, creativity and insights which will help me argue persuasively for better ways of doing business in the County Council.

For me, being a councillor is not about taking decisions ‘for’ or ‘on behalf of’ local people. It is about taking decisions ‘with’ and ‘fully informed by’ local people. This is one of the reasons I started this FB group a little over two years ago. I wanted to create a place where we could connect and have conversations about what matters to each one of us. And it has become a place which has helped keep me up to date with what matters (as well as find lost cats, caravans and wallets etc). A vote for me is a vote for the kind of politics that is done ‘with’ and ‘not to’ our local community. I am the kind of politician that listens because I like to not because I feel I have to…

The County Council has existed for 128 years and has been run by the Conservative Party all that time. I don’t think that is going to change anytime soon. But what I do believe must change is the power of local opposition parties to hold the ruling administration to account. We are all democrats and wise enough to know that power without challenge is a dangerous (and inefficient) thing: there need to be checks and balances… and hard questions and scrutiny. A vote for me is a vote for lots of that. My good friend and colleague, County Councillor Robin Stuchbury has punched way above his weight and punctured some of the complacency there is in a 128 year old government. Just think what two or more of us will achieve for local democracy, transparency and value for money.

I am not going to insult your intelligence by making lots of vague promises to smooth all the roads, fully resource all our schools, provide excellent care for all adults and children that need some, burn all our waste ecologically and economically or install a chocolate fountain in the middle of Buckingham (etc). These are all very important (well, perhaps apart from the fountain!) and I will use every ounce of my energy, wily political spirit and creativity to achieve them. But there are tough times ahead. But I will promise to do all that I can do to get the County Council working better for you.

I want us all, throughout our time here on earth, to lead ambitious lives: lives that make a difference. Nothing delights me more than to hear stories of what people have achieved or what they hope to do. In my book, the job of national and local government is to do as little as possible but as much as possible to help people achieve their goals, dreams and ambitions for themselves and their families. (Why ‘as little’? Because government shouldn’t get in the way on people’s ambitions. Why ‘as much’? Because the purpose of government is to do what individuals cannot do on their own.) This is my kind of politics. This is me. I know that many people locally would never vote ‘red’ in a national election...

But I am asking you to vote for me. Thanks.

Potholes: aaarrgghh!!!

I think it is generally agreed that the roads in Buckinghamshire are in an appalling state, possibly significantly worse than comparable counties. Although there appears to be no set of measures by which we can grade our County for how bad/good it is, we all want and need things to improve. And we all know, don't we, that this is going to take a great deal more money? (Far more than the County Council has got after it pays for schools, adults needing care, children who are being looked after, riding stable purchases and so forth...)

Or do we?

Is it just possible that we could have better roads without more money? 

Allow me to propose some options for doing so... (And this is not the first time I have mentioned these - but it would appear that Transport for Bucks and its commissioner the County Council are not brilliant at listening to troublesome people like me...)

Option one: introduce a warranty scheme

It seems to me that some of the worst potholes happen in the places where the road has been dug up before by a service organisation (gas, water, telecoms etc) and resurfaced - but not very well. The joins between the old and new surfaces let in the water and hey presto potholes begin to form. How about if all agencies that dig up the roads had to pay for a warranty scheme. So if a pothole appears within say five years of the work they have done, the warranty scheme pays for the repair (and a darn good repair that is!) And because warranty schemes are like insurance policies, the better road diggers will pay less whilst the diggers who leave behind jobs at risk of becoming potholes will begin to pay more. This will incentivise the road diggers to leave behind good seals on the surfaces they have replaced (etc becuase it is just about good seals...) Now, this might take primary legislation to enact - but is anyone looking into this? Could our County Council be insisting on such a scheme for any organisation that wants to dig up our roads using existing powers?

Option two: do better repairs!!

Every time I drive to MK on the A422, I am struck by the road repairs near the new solar farm close to the BP garage. Why? Because the whole width of the carriageway (well half of it anyways) has been replaced. The bad pot holes that were there before were not just patched (as they probably would have been in Bucks). Northamptonshire made sure a good and lasting repair was done. And so I think somehow, someway the contract between Bucks CC and Transport for Buckinghamshire has allowed / encouraged / forced (???) TfB to do pretty useless repairs - often called 'patch and run'. How about reviewing the contract and looking for ways to reward TfB for doing repairs that last? Surely if we can put a man on the moon and now make phones with more computing power than all of NASA in the sixties - there is the technology to do great road repairs?! Maybe using different filling materials or sealants etc...

Option three: start again and look at the whole system

I have good friend and colleague who has done excellent work in the field of lean and systems thinking. Dave Gaster (Support Services Direct) has also done some brilliant work around potholes as well. He talks about how costs for repairing potholes and improving roads can be dramatically reduced by removing inefficiency from the system/processes used, investing in robust inspection regimes designed to prevent potholes forming rather than just fixing the ones that do occur. From reading about his practice, I am convinced there are ways in which TfB / BCC could reduce costs and improve the roads...

(The three options are not mutually exclusive by the way!)

In the end, this is all about installing 'stay fix' methods rather than 'quick fix' ones. This is something I have taught about for years as a management/leadership trainer, blogged (http://jonharveyassociates.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/what-is-your-cutting-angle.html) and even produced a short video (in two parts) about (1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgE3PEmI7yw&feature=youtube_gdata & 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yyp0AQx9meM&feature=youtube_gdata).

Is there anyone in Buckinghamshire County Council or TfB that gets this stuff? Is anyone listening?

The state of our roads would suggest otherwise...

What can a Labour councillor do in a sea of blue?

For the last four years, Cllr Robin Stuchbury has been a lone Labour voice on the Conservative dominated County Council. And for six years now, Robin has been on his own for some of the time or with just one other Labour Councillor (now Cllr Mark Bateman) on the District Council, again dominated by Conservative councillors. Notwithstanding the positive relationship that Robin has with local LibDems, Independents and often, perhaps surprisingly, UKIP councillors, this has been some engrossing and challenging years for him.

You might be forgiven for thinking that Robin has been limited to shouting into a bucket over this time. But that is not so. And although the ruling parties in each council would never admit it of course... he has had impacts in many places, asked important questions which have led to change and on several occasions proposed policies which although initially resisted then magically become the way things should be done... In other words Cllr Robin Stuchbury punches way above his weight, speaking up for the many (not just the few) across all of the County and District.

It is my sincere hope that Robin is re-elected to the County Council come May 4th. Indeed, I probably want and hope for that more than success in my own election!

But allow me to evidence my assertions above. First let's turn to the County Council. Throughout his time in County Hall, Robin has participated in many scrutiny inquiries into services for children - as school students overall and children at risk of harm. Here is a list of some of those inquiries:

For example, Robin was an active member of the "Narrowing the Gap" investigation into the attainment gap between economically and socially disadvantaged pupils and their peers in Buckinghamshire. (I cannot seem to find the original report on the County website now - as the links to it appear to be broken both from here: the list of completed inquiries in the County Council and from the report linked above. Here is a link to the Cabinet response to the original report. But here is a link to copy that I dug out of old correspondence as it would seem the County have archived it now...)

Robin tells me that it often felt as if he was the only councillor (aside from the Chair of the committee) to have read the background papers before the meetings and was a key contributor to the discussions and questioning of the external contributors. I think the proceedings were filmed and stored, so this can be seen on the tapes.

Cllr Stuchbury has also being closely involved with:

• Young People Ready for Work 
• Children's Internet Safety 
• Child Sexual Exploitation 
• Children’s Workforce Inquiry 
• Voice of the Child and Young Person

Details of all these inquiries can be found here. In many cases, links to the whole original documents are not working. However Robin can send you the full reports if you wish.

By re-electing Robin and by electing me: the residents of North Bucks will benefit from having councillors who will question, who will challenge, who will scrutinise, who will research and who will oppose (on occasion) decisions made by the ruling group in the County Council - robustly, constructively and tirelessly. 

Robin's leaflet (Buckingham West)

Jon's leaflet! (Buckingham East)

Welcome to this campaign blog

The County Council elections are getting closer and closer. Right now I am working closely with Cllr Robin Stuchbury (who currently represents Buckingham East - and is standing for re-election) and many other Labour colleagues to plan our campaign. Watch this space for news, campaign leaflets and other commentary.

A vote for Jon (and Robin in Buckingham West) is a vote for a better challenged, questioned and scrutinised County Council. 

Robin has been working hard over the last 4 years to represent his constituents and ensure the County Council delivers value for money for all local tax payers. Robin and Jon are looking forward to working together with other elected Labour Councillors to make sure that Buckinghamshire County Council works on behalf of all the people of the county to provide improved services that meet local needs.

But of course, if you are content with what the County Council does for you, your family and your local community, we would expect you to vote for the Conservative Party who have been running the County for over 125 years...

A vote for Labour is a vote for a different kind of future...! It is a vote for change.