Spokespeople from social care charities have responded to the levelling up committee quizzing care minister Gillian Keegan and Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) minister Kemi Badenoch on long-term funding of adult social care.

The committee focused their attention on the funding gap and the specifics of the £5.4 billion Health and Social Care Levy, with the DLUHC claiming that, as far as they can see, enough money is being provided to the sector. They did, however, admit that the demand for adult social care can very quickly outstrip the funding provided. 

The committee also discussed the fair cost of care, with one member implying that even the terminology is a clear implication that the system is unfair, to begin with. As Keegan alluded “the reality is that nobody has a clear picture of this very complex system,” most agree however that this sector requires a clearer breakdown of where additional financing is going.

Kari Gerstheimer, chief executive of Access Social Care felt that the government rhetoric surrounding levelling up is not being backed up by real changes to long-term funding of adult social care. “Whilst we can see great ambition in what the care minister and DLUHC minister wish to achieve, the fundamentals of financing have not yet changed,” she added. “Care users and providers need these statements to be matched by tangible resources with a mathematical link to the level of need. 

Gerstheimer agreed that the care sector, including adult social care, is chronically underfunded and undervalued, saying this is leaving a social care provision that is not adequate for the needs of the current population. “Access Social Care welcomes the additional £5.4 billion in funding provided by the Health and Social Care Levy, but it is simply woefully inadequate and focused on the reforms being proposed, rather than the here and now funding challenges.

She pointed out that more than 500,000 people are on a waiting list just to get an assessment for social care, with the cost of living increase meaning that social care workers can’t afford to stay in the sector, leaving for jobs in retail and hospitality. She added that the current funding system has placed greater reliance on council tax and business rates retention and reduced the central government grant, with less redistribution in the system than previously, meaning that poorer areas with greater social care need have less money to spend on social care – creating a postcode lottery that flies in the face of the levelling up agenda. 

“Local authorities spend around 70% of their budget on social care,” she said. “They face huge battles to balance their budgets. Too many are unlawfully rationing care because they can’t afford to meet the needs of their population. 

“There is no doubt that this committee was discussing a system that is in dire need of reform, we need funding that empowers local authorities to provide adequate care of acceptable quality. We will all need social care at some point whether for ourselves or a loved one.

Deborah Auty, head of communications at Revitalise, which provides respite breaks for disabled people and carers, said that “carers have been underappreciated and overworked” for decades, with that charity’s research showing that 74% of carers have been left feeling exhausted and worn out as a result of caring during the Covid-19 pandemic.

“Yesterday’s committee meeting with Keegan and Badenoch once again highlights the lack of any structured plan to reform the social care system and instead continues to undervalue the importance of looking after the carers who hold the sector together. 

“As Keegan mentioned in the committee meeting yesterday, ‘the reality is that nobody has a clear picture of this very complex system’. We must do better.

“For a system that has been under immense pressure over the past two years, I ask Keegan, Badenoch and the government to work with those in the field and commit to a detailed and structured plan which is needed to reform the social care sector whilst making the system sustainable for the next generation.”

What do you think? Have your say by emailing [email protected].