If the opinion polls are correct, we will wake up on 5th July with a new Government. So, it is no wonder that many social care leaders are clamouring for political parties to say what they will do about a system that has been beset by over a decade of austerity, with its weaknesses exposed by COVID-19 and a deepening dislocation between people’s needs and aspirations and the capacity of the current system to deliver them.
Approach with caution
History suggests that all of us championing the cause of social care reform should be careful about what we wish for. Why the caution? The challenges of social care are deep-seated, ranging from workforce, funding, unmet needs and a lack of agreement about its very purpose. Sorting them out will need much more than short-term fixes and will take longer than a single parliament. That means a long-term plan that commands cross-party co-operation, if not consensus.
Yet, general election campaigns by their very nature are adversarial and short term, driven by competing views about what is ‘best for the country’. In the heat of campaigning, parties disparage their opponent’s ideas irrespective of their merits. The demands of retail politics do not sit well with evidence-based policy.
Weaponisation of social care
In this febrile climate, it is easy for politicians to take advantage of poor public understanding of social care, especially when it comes to how it should be paid for – and by whom. That is why we should be nervous about parties using the election to float new ideas about social care funding. In 2010, that led to the ‘death tax’ row, and triggered the collapse of cross-party talks. Seven years later, tables were turned with the ‘dementia tax’ debacle, seen by many as a key factor in the Conservatives losing its majority.
The weaponisation of social care at election time has an even more insidious and lasting consequence. It embeds the idea in the minds of politicians that it belongs in the ‘too difficult’ box, an electoral liability. It is no wonder that Labour’s ‘bomb-proof’ manifesto is likely to omit any specific pledges about social care funding reform, less they be used against it.
Socio-economic value
So, while the sound of silence may surround social care during the election, the argument is really about the pitfalls of starting the discussion around a negative vocabulary of money, costs, death and taxes. That is not to say an honest debate about how much good care costs and how we pay for it is not important. But the heat and noise of electioneering is the worst time to start it. A better launchpad would be to recognise the importance of social care to our social and economic infrastructure and that the success of social and demographic change has propelled it towards becoming an essential public service.
It is not unreasonable therefore, to ask political parties to set out their ambition for what a good system of care and support should look like, tempered with a pragmatic realism about the time it will take to achieve and the resources that will be required. Getting social care reform into the Overton window will make it less difficult for Government to avoid the funding issues that must be tackled.
The power of relationships
A final reason for caution is that the words of politicians before an election are far less important than their actions in office. Election manifestos are not the be all and end all when it comes to policy commitments. The 2024 general election offers an opportunity to raise the profile of social care, not as a cost or a financial burden, but something we value just as much as the NHS.
The election of a new Government will almost certainly create momentum for change that has been absent in recent years. Whoever wins power faces a grim inheritance in terms of public finances, but no shortage of ideas for the long-term transformation of social care. The ability of social care leaders to develop constructive and influential relationships with whoever forms the next Government will matter far more than adding to the fury of electioneering that, ultimately, may signify little.
How can the value of the adult social care sector be made more visible to the public in the run up to the general election? Leave a comment on this article or join the conversation to share your thoughts.
Richard Humphries is a Senior Policy Advisor to the Health Foundation.
Email: [email protected] X: @RichardnotatKF