Officials surrender after three-year fight to block release of dataBy Paul Hutcheon, Scottish Political Editor
GOVERNMENT officials last week gave up a three-year fight to block the release of secret files which showed how a succession of Labour ministers opposed free personal care when the policy was backed by former first minister Henry McLeish.
The SNP administration's decision to drop plans to challenge information commissioner Kevin Dunion's decision on disclosure has uncovered the hostility towards the policy by Labour on both sides of the Border.
The Sunday Herald had asked in 2005 for all ministerial correspondence within the Labour-led Executive that dealt with the flagship free care policy.
The previous Executive was ready to challenge Dunion's decision on disclosure by seeking a judicial review.
However, SNP ministers dropped the case and released the correspondence on Friday, a decision that reveals the queasiness felt by Labour ministers about the policy.
Free personal care became a key issue in 2000 when the UK government and Scottish Executive were considering their responses to the Royal Commission on Long-Term Care - chaired by Sir Stewart Sutherland - which had backed the policy.
The pressure on both administrations to accept the recommendation appeared to have receded in autumn 2000, when the argument for targeting support on older people held sway on both sides of the Border.
The debate changed in October of that year following the death of Labour first minister Donald Dewar, who was replaced by Henry McLeish, a supporter of free personal care.
A parliamentary statement in January 2001 by parliamentary business manager Tom McCabe announced the Executive's belated support for free personal care.
However, freedom of information documents released by the Scottish government show most of McLeish's Labour colleagues were opposed to a policy they believed benefited the better-off.
Susan Deacon - health minister during the protracted debates on elderly care - was the most consistent opponent.
As far back as July 2000, when Dewar was first minister, Deacon circulated a minute to Cabinet on Sutherland-related issues that questioned free personal care on the grounds of value for money: "It has been clear from the outset that the UK government was not minded to accept the main recommendation, which would benefit only the small number of self-funders (7000 in Scotland) and do nothing to improve quality of care or rebalance provision towards care provision at home.
"These recommendations have assumed a symbolic significance out of all proportion to the benefits they would bring."
The anti-free personal care approach seemed to win the support of Cabinet, with the then finance minister Jack McConnell stating in a reply: "I am content with the approach Susan Deacon proposes."
Deacon, who favoured targeting resources on those most in need, was still sceptical of the policy two weeks before McCabe backed it in parliament in January 2001.
A memo sent to her Cabinet colleagues warned: "If introduced in isolation, the provision of universally free personal care would compound certain problems by, for example increasing demand for services which are already in short supply."
She also told her colleagues that free personal care would raise "complex, cross-border' issues" and claimed the funding did not exist for the policy. "We do not have a basis of rigorous information and understanding of the picture to justify further major policy change in this area at this time. Nor do we have identified resources to fund a major extension of free care or service provision at this time."
McLeish's finance minister and ally, Angus MacKay, was another Labour figure who raised serious questions about the policy. In a memo sent in November 2000, he wrote: "I understand the personal care element ... would cost some £60 million per annum. To find this within the spending review period we would need to look again at allocations to programmes since the reserve is already dangerously low. It is hard to see where we could take such a large sum from, without doing more damage than the positive reaction that we might get from a personal care package."
His colleague, the then environment minister Sam Galbraith, was more blunt in his criticism, as made clear in another memo: "Just because a large body of opinion suggested it does not make it right. There was a time when most people supported the proposition that the word was flat."
Labour MSP Jackie Baillie, at that point minister for social justice, also flagged up concerns about the policy after the McCabe statement.
She was worried that free personal care would result in older people who were staying in their own homes being treated poorly. A memo in her name states: "It would also be unfortunate if we were to establish a disincentive for older people to remain in their own homes by appearing to treat them as a group less favourably than those in residential care."
McLeish also faced resistance from Labour colleagues south of the Border, according to the documents.
The body set up to flesh out the policy, the Care Development Group, required statistics from the UK Department of Social Security (DSS) in order to map out free personal care, a request that was turned down.
One email between officials inside the Scottish health department noted ruefully: "I think it is fair to assume that if they are not prepared to co-operate on paper the chances of DSS sending someone to Edinburgh to give us a presentation must be slim. Politics appear to be key here."
Another email states: "The DSS response was to refer us to their website. They have since made it quite clear that they are unable to offer further assistance."
Apart from general obstructionism, the DSS, headed by Labour MP Alistair Darling, tried to scupper free personal care by withholding £23m in attendance allowance that was paid to Scotland in benefits.
A letter from McLeish to Darling made clear his concerns about the UK government's stance: "Our opponents will say this is £23m taken from people in Scotland and spent on increasing benefits to people in England. I do not need to spell out for you the comfort that would give to those who oppose the devolution settlement, question the goodwill of the Westminster government or who argue that conflict between Westminster and Edinburgh is inevitably within the current settlement."
However, the policy was implemented and remains one of the few initiatives that has won praise for MSPs among the public, despite problems with underfunding.
Labour, too, learned to love the policy. Despite its ministers on both sides of the Border trying to block free personal care, the party listed it as its top achievement in their manifesto for the 2003 Holyrood elections.
