Theresa May's 'puzzling' social care voucher idea faces ridicule

‘Being told you can’t have an insurance system but you can have some vouchers to help you save, some of the money you would need if your house were to burn down, I don’t think would really be the answer’

Sir Andrew said ‘we should always be very weary until we actually see what is in the manifestos’ (Corbis)

Vouchers to address the crisis in social care provisions have been ridiculed as “puzzling” by Sir Andrew Dilnot, who carried out a government review into funding for the support in England during the coalition.

It comes after reports emerged suggesting Theresa May is considering a voucher scheme to help families meet the soaring costs of elderly social care, requiring workers to sacrifice some of their salary to benefit – mirroring childcare vouchers.

The Prime Minister has previously hinted the Conservative party manifesto could address the issue as she told supporters at an election campaign speech that politicians can no longer “duck the issue” and that her Government had been “working on a long-term solution” for the needs of an ageing population.

But Sir Andrew, who carried out a government review into funding for care and support in England during in 2010, said all politicians had, so far, failed in their attempts to alleviate the pressures on the system and urged the party that wins the general election to act urgently.

On the suggestion of vouchers, however, Sir Andrew, said “we should always be very weary until we actually see what is in the manifestos” and poured cold water on the idea. “I’m puzzled by the suggestion,” he said.

“The system we have at the moment it is one where… imagine it was your house rather than your social care, you’ve got no way of protecting your house from burning down, you need an insurance system for that. Being told you can’t have an insurance system but you can have some vouchers to help you save, some of the money you would need if your house were to burn down, I don’t think would really be the answer.”

On the triple lock, Mr Dilnot said: “I think if you’re concerned about the welfare of pensioners, doing something about social care is probably more important and more valuable than the triple lock. There is scope for some adjustment between the two.”

He also urged the next government to urgently implement the recommendations of his 2011 report. “I do think it is time for us to stop talking and start acting,” he added. “The peak of my frustration came just after the last election when the manifesto commitment was at least ditched or postponed, so I hope that all of the parties in this election campaign will be clear that they are going to act.

“It’s perfectly reasonable to have a Green Paper as long as it’s soon and as long as it’s a Green Paper that sets out action that is going to be implemented very quickly. But be should by November of this year – absolutely without no doubt – have set in place implementation plans to deal with this.

“The number of us who are growing old is increasing and that should be a matter of enormous celebration. This is one are though that we haven’t got sorted out and in a civilised country we really ought to.”

Last month Mr Dilnot condemned Britain’s social care system as “the most pernicious means-test in the whole of the British welfare state”.