Disabled people have warned that £40m allocated to bring in free personal care for under-65s could end up leaving them no better off or even in a worse position.
The budget saw the money allocated to implement “Frank’s Law” ending the disparity between those over 65 who receive free personal care and younger people with high care needs who must pay.
From next April, under 65s will also receive free personal care as a result of a campaign led by Amanda Kopel, widow of ex-Dundee United player Frank Kopel, who died from early onset dementia.
But campaigners fear the Scottish Government’s move will backfire unless measures are put in place to prevent councils seizing on any additional income from those who benefit, to pay for other care costs.
Campaigners say such care charging – which they dub the ‘care tax’ – has soared as cash-strapped councils increasingly insist on payment for services such as help getting dressed or out of bed, or going out to the shops.
The Scottish Government’s own feasibility study said this was a risk, “potentially leaving the client with a smaller increase in available income than that intended by the policy”. But ministers are understood to believe this will only affect a minority of people.
Norma Curran, spokesman for Scotland Against the Care Tax (SACT) said that while the sum involved had risen from an initial £11m to £40m, the announcement was still disappointing. “This policy will not meet the hopes of thousands of disabled people,” she said. “Instead of making disabled people better off, most will now find they are still paying exactly the same amount in charges for “social care” as they used to pay for “personal care and social care” combined.”
On average disabled people under 65 receive larger support packages than older people, she said, with support to live indepdendently as possible. “This additional support will still be charged for and as a result most disabled people in this situation will see no benefit from this policy.
“Scotland Against the Care Tax is concerned that a day like today should have been a day to celebrate. Instead it is a day of missed opportunities.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel