The Guardian view on social care: while politicians dither, those in need suffer

The Guardian

21-04-2025

The rising human cost of our shamefully inadequate social care system is illustrated by the shocking case of Hugh Kirsch, as reported by the Guardian. Mr Kirsch, who is 66 and has severe learning difficulties, suffered abuse in a previous placement. That home, Mendip House, was closed down. Now his family fear another disruption is on the way. For nine years he has been looked after by Somerset Care, but this organisation has said that it can't keep going on the 0% annual rise offered by Haringey, the London council that funds him. Mr Kirsch may be evicted as a result.
His past bad experience makes this story particularly dismaying. But the threat hanging over him is in no way unique. For every dispute over social care costs that garners press attention, there are many others that stay hidden.
A 0% increase is tough for providers at any time. But steeply rising costs mean it is currently untenable. This month's increase in employer national insurance contributions has left the social care sector with an estimated £2.8bn bill – and no way of meeting it except by putting up fees. Disturbingly, not-for-profits such as Somerset Care are particularly exposed to these financial risks since they rely heavily on council funding. By contrast, homes with more privately funded residents are in a better position to cross-subsidise places and meet shortfalls.
Already, charitable care providers have begun handing back contracts, and there are fears that for‑profit, private-equity-backed businesses could be the only bidders left if non-profits exit the market rather than slash costs. Yet despite this worsening situation on the ground, and warnings of the demographic and financial challenges dating back years, a policy solution to the UK's social care crisis is still years off.
Louise Casey, the person chosen by Sir Keir Starmer's government to find a solution and build a cross-party consensus around funding, is widely respected for her bold interventions in highly contested areas. But diverting her from social care to produce a short report on grooming, as ministers did in January, sent a terrible message about the lack of urgency that bedevils this issue. It should have been possible to find someone else in order that the social care work could begin straight away.
Given recent upheavals in health policy, it is no wonder that social care is once again stuck on the sidelines. The decision to abolish NHS England, and the upcoming launch of a 10-year plan, are enough to keep any health secretary busy – even one as ambitious as Wes Streeting. But the dangers of doing nothing are not limited to the distress caused to individuals and families caught in the middle of conflicts like the one described above. There is also the risk that the sector as a whole is weakened by further delays.
The problems are UK-wide. Scottish non‑profits sent their own appeal to the chancellor in November, after the SNP government scrapped plans for a Scottish national care service. Organisations across the country deserve better from politicians, as do the vulnerable people whose needs they were set up to meet.