Social care tax ‘remains on the table’

A compulsory levy to pay for social care “remains on the table”, Andy Burnham, the health secretary, said yesterday – despite the Conservatives’ blanket refusal to back what they dub a compulsory “death tax“.

His stance came after a conference of about 40 organisations representing carers, the elderly and other social care recipients issued a summary of their discussions supporting the idea of “an element of compulsion” on everyone to help fund social care.

A majority, though not a large one, rejected the other options the government has put forward in its

green paper . Under those approaches everyone would get some help, perhaps a third of costs, with that potentially being allied to private insurance for the remainder, or a voluntary state-backed scheme.

But the conference – which was closed to the media – was clear that rather than the flat rate levy of £20,000 that the government has put forward, payable at or near retirement, or from someone’s estate, any contribution should be progressive, with the better-off paying more.

One of those attending noted that these were “the views of the social care lobby”, not necessarily those of taxpayers’ and voters generally.

But Mr Burnham said that the meeting had been “pretty clear”, and the reason he would not remove the compulsory option – as Andrew Lansley, the Conservative health spokesman, is demanding – is that “the people who are most involved in this [caring] want it to be on the table”.

He underlined, however, that “the government has not taken a decision” and stressed that there are “pros and cons for all the approaches”.

“Compulsion provides peace of mind, even to those who don’t use it because they know it is there. It is cheaper than the voluntary option because everyone is in, and that can bring the overall cost down. But the downside is that it does take away individual choice.”

There was some irritation among attendees at Mr Lansley’s decision to boycott a conference that he dubbed “a party political ploy” by Labour.

One option the conference raised was “soft compulsion” where people would be enrolled into a state-run insurance scheme but retain the right to opt out.

Despite the lack of unanimity, Mr Burnham said he hoped to produce “firm proposals” in a white paper before the election.