HL Deb 18 July 1994 vol 557 cc6-8

2.55 p.m.

Lord Stallard asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they have considered Age Concern's report Preserved and Protected? which makes recommendations concerning the community care reforms and people with retained rights to income support; and, if so, with what result.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Social Security (Viscount Astor)

My Lords, Ministers from the Departments of Social Security and Health have considered the report and have met with representatives of Age Concern. Those representations will be taken into account when income support limits are reviewed as part of the general uprating exercise.

Lord Stallard

My Lords, I am grateful for that reply. Would the noble Viscount care to comment on the report's findings about the shortfall between income support rates and care home fees in certain areas, including the London area even allowing for the Greater London allowance? Will he further comment on the recommendation that the Government should implement Section 135 of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act, especially immediately to identify those areas where income support limits are clearly inadequate to meet care home fees, and to revise those income support limits accordingly?

Viscount Astor

My Lords, the Age Concern report accepts that limits are adequate in many areas. We are not convinced that costs vary over the country beyond the Greater London area which, as the noble Lord pointed out, has an increased rate. Of course we welcome all such representations, and they are taken into account together with all other evidence available when we review income support rates. As I said, there is no evidence at present that there are significant variations in the costs for residential care in different parts of the country. However, the Secretary of State has the power to vary the limits if necessary.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham

My Lords, is the Minister aware that the shortfall to which my noble friend referred is often £20 a week or more? If an elderly person is in a private residential home and that person and the family cannot afford to meet the shortfall the local authority has the power to do so. If that same elderly person is in a private nursing home the local authority has no such power. There are reports of these people, the most frail of the elderly, being evicted. Will the Government tell us what they are going to do about that?

Viscount Astor

My Lords, I am not aware and the department is not aware of any evictions. If the noble Baroness is aware of any evictions I should be grateful if she would bring them to our attention. Nor am I aware that any local authority has had to transfer residents to alternative accommodation because of evictions.

The noble Baroness is right in respect of the difference between residential care and nursing home care. However, in nursing home care those evicted would be the responsibility of the National Health Service.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Can we then look forward to the Minister consulting his right honourable friend in the Department of Health to ensure that health authorities have the same power, responsibility and authority to top up nursing home fees as local authorities have in relation to private residential home fees?

Viscount Astor

My Lords, as I said in answer to the original Question, Ministers from the Departments of Social Security and Health met representatives of Age Concern. Ministers from the two departments are in regular contact.

Lord Monkswell

My Lords, is the Minister really saying that it is possible for elderly people in homes to be evicted? If that is the situation, are the Government not totally ashamed and are they not prepared to take action to prevent it? Are they aware of the horrific anxiety caused to people who have that threat of eviction hanging over their heads even if it is not implemented? I beg the Government for an answer.

Viscount Astor

My Lords, I cannot accept what the noble Lord says. I should point out to him that 267,000 people in residential care and nursing home care now receive help through income support. That figure compares with only 12,000 in 1979. We spend £2.6 billion in income support for those people compared with £10 million in 1979.

Since its recent introduction, we believe that community care is working well.

Lord Monkswell

My Lords, will the Government answer the question?

Noble Lords

Order!

Lord Stallard

My Lords, in the Minister's original reply, he referred to the problem of the London area. Is it not a fact that this year's increases are linked to the RPI, but that the London area in general will receive no increase? The increase is linked to RPI only outside London. London receives no increase on its allowance.

Viscount Astor

My Lords, increases for nursing home limits are greater than residential care limits because the costs are greater. The sum of £10 a week was added to all nursing home limits in the recent uprating.

Perhaps I may point out to the noble Lord that there is quite a substantial difference between the London limits and the limits in the remainder of the country.

The Countess of Mar

My Lords, does the noble Viscount appreciate that a great many charities now help with the shortfall on nursing and residential care homes? But the charities are increasingly becoming unable to meet that shortfall because they lack funds. Will the Minister please ensure that there is enough money either from social services or the National Health Service to ensure that the charities are not bled dry?

Viscount Astor

My Lords, I understand that the level of fees for which local authorities are contracting tend to follow closely the limits available for people with preserved rights; that is, those who were already in residential or nursing home care on 1st April 1993.