at the moment so that they pay a bit less. they will still be paying. i think a lot of people will be quite shocked to find they are still paying up to £86,000, but at least they get some compensation. lots of people will still have to sell their homes to pay for their care, though borisjohnson had promised that nobody would. and there will be very little left over for what is really the most important question, which is the very low quality of care. nearly 2 million people who are not getting any care who would have qualified a decade ago, but the threshold has been raised so they no longer qualify for any care at all, and the care home owners and people who provide care are desperate. they cannot keep their staff, they can t pay their staff enough. what the state pays for each person is much too little and i am afraid it doesn t solve any of those. it s a little bit, but probably about the same little bit that s been given every year as a bung to keep it going. and to begin with, th
some compensation. lots of people will still have to sell their homes to pay for their care, though borisjohnson had promised nobody would. and there will be very little left over from what is really the most important question, which is the very low quality of care. nearly 2 million people who are not getting any care, who would have qualified a decade ago, but the threshold has been raised so they no longer qualify for any care at all, and the care home owners and people who provide care are desperate. they cannot keep their staff, they can t pay their staff enough. what the state pays for each person is much too little, and i am afraid it does not solve any of those. a little bit, but probably about the same little bit that it has been given a three year as a bung to keep going. and to begin with, the money is going to go to the nhs anyway, rather than social care, because the government thinks there is catching up to do because of the backlog of cases
who provide care are desperate. they cannot keep their staff, they can t pay their staff enough. what the state pays for each person is much too little and i am afraid it doesn t solve any of those. it s a little bit, but probably about the same little bit that s been given every year as a bung to keep it going. and to begin with, the money is going to go to the nhs anyway, rather than to social care, because the government thinks there is catching up to do because of the backlog of cases brought about by covid, where only covid patients were really being seen in hospital. simon, we have got this rather unusual situation where we have got a conservative government in favour of tax increases and a labour opposition who don t want to see them because, as polly alluded to there, they don t regard them as being fair, they re being regressive, so what s the alternative? well, the phrase that is doing the rounds at the moment is, i good politics, bad policy, i in the sense that the politics
they will still be paying. i think a lot of people will be quite shocked to find they are still paying up to £86,000, but at least they get some compensation. lots of people will still have to sell their homes to pay for their care, though borisjohnson had promised that nobody would. and there will be very little left over for what is really the most important question, which is the very low quality of care. nearly 2 million people who are not getting any care who would have qualified a decade ago, but the threshold has been raised so they no longer qualify for any care at all, and the care home owners and people who provide care are desperate. they cannot keep their staff, they can t pay their staff enough. what the state pays for each person is much too little and i am afraid it doesn t solve any of those. it s a little bit, but probably about the same little bit that s been given every year as a bung to keep it going. and to begin with, the money