Connect with us

Published

on

Boris Johnson has appeared to step back from a manifesto commitment on social care, after a controversial change to his government’s reforms to the system in England were narrowly backed by MPs.

The prime minister committed in the 2019 Conservative Party manifesto that “nobody needing care should be forced to sell their home to pay for it”.

But addressing his cabinet on Tuesday, Mr Johnson told his ministers that “no one will be forced to sell a home they or their spouse is living in as it will not be counted as an asset”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Moment MPs vote on controversial care proposal

Speaking to Sky News on Monday, a minister failed to guarantee that people will not have to sell their homes to pay for care.

The PM’s comments to his top team come after the government won a Commons vote on its Health and Care Bill.

Having promised to “fix the crisis in social care” on the steps of Downing Street when he became PM, Mr Johnson in September announced a cap on care costs for adults in England from October 2023, promising a limit of £86,000 on how much an individual has to pay over their lifetime.

Last week, the government announced it was introducing an amendment to the reforms which will mean that only the amount a person personally contributes to their care costs will count towards the £86,000 cap.

More on Social Care

Anything the individual’s local authority contributes will not be counted.

The change has sparked accusations it will be unfair on poorer people and those who live in areas where homes are worth less.

What are the changes and why could they be unfair?

In September the government announced a new £86,000 cap on the amount anyone in England should have to pay for their care when they get older or unwell.

People with less than £20,000 in assets – value of their home, savings or investments – will not have to pay anything towards their care, which is up from £14,250.

Those with assets between £20,000 and £100,000 will also now be eligible for new means-tested financial support from their local councils to help with the cost of their care.

This is calculated by taking into account how much income you have – and whether you are nearer the £20,000 lower limit or £100,000 upper limit.

But changes announced last week reveal that those means-tested payments you receive from your local council do not count towards the £86,000 cap.

This has led to accusations it will be unfair on poorer people and those who live in areas where homes are worth less.

For example, if you have a home worth £90,000, under the new means-tested system, you will be eligible for local council payments to help with the ongoing cost of your care.

But those payments don’t count towards the £86,000 limit, at which point you no longer have to pay anything.

So the journey to that £86,000 will be slowed down by local council payments that don’t count towards the cap – forcing you to pay with your own money instead.

The only way of reaching the cap will be spending £86,000 of your own money on care, at which point you only have £4,000 left.

But because the £86,000 cap is universal, someone with a home worth £1m won’t get council support, but will reach the £86,000 cap quicker, and be left with more than £900,000.

A total of 18 Conservatives voted against the plans, joining Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the SNP, as Boris Johnson’s working majority of 80 was cut sharply.

A further 70 Tories had no vote recorded, although this does not necessarily mean that they abstained.

And in a revelation that may risk further angering opponents of the plans, Health Secretary Sajid Javid has told a committee of MPs that an impact assessment of the policy will not be available until “early in the new year”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Care costs ‘in the right direction’ – former health secretary

“We are unable to provide information at a regional or individual level, as the funding at local authority level has not yet been agreed,” Mr Javid wrote to Mel Stride, chairman of the Treasury Select Committee.

“It is important to reiterate, however, that nobody will be worse off under the system we are proposing than the one currently in operation.”

The health secretary reiterated the government’s defence of its reforms, stating that the existing system “exposes too many people to unlimited costs” and the changes will “put an end to unpredictable costs”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Labour MP insists rich must pay more to fund social care

“More people will be supported with their social care costs, have greater certainty over what they need to pay and, thanks to wider reforms to the social care system, will receive higher quality care,” Mr Javid insisted.

The PM’s spokesman said the policy was the “correct approach” and the government had “no intention” of performing a U-turn.

Continue Reading

Politics

‘Shameful’ that black boys in London more likely to die than white boys, says Met Police chief

Published

on

By

'Shameful' that black boys in London more likely to die than white boys, says Met Police chief

It is “shameful” that black boys growing up in London are “far more likely” to die than white boys, Metropolitan Police chief Sir Mark Rowley has told Sky News.

The commissioner told Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips that relations with minority communities “is difficult for us”.

Sir Mark, who came out of retirement to become head of the UK’s largest police force in 2022, said: “We can’t pretend otherwise that we’ve got a history between policing and black communities where policing has got a lot wrong.

“And we get a lot more right today, but we do still make mistakes. That’s not in doubt. I’m being as relentless in that as it can be.”

He said the “vast majority” of the force are “good people”.

However, he added: “But that legacy, combined with the tragedy that some of this crime falls most heavily in black communities, that creates a real problem because the legacy creates concern.”

Sir Mark, who also leads the UK’s counter-terrorism policing, said it is “not right” that black boys growing up in London “are far more likely to be dead by the time they’re 18” than white boys.

“That’s, I think, shameful for the city,” he admitted.

The Met Police chief’s admission comes two years after an official report found the force is institutionally racist, misogynistic and homophobic.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Police chase suspected phone thief

Baroness Casey was commissioned in 2021 to look into the Met Police after serving police officer Wayne Couzens abducted, raped and murdered Sarah Everard.

She pinned the primary blame for the Met’s culture on its past leadership and found that stop and search and the use of force against black people was excessive.

At the time, Sir Mark, who had been commissioner for six months when the report was published, said he would not use the labels of institutionally racist, institutionally misogynistic and institutionally homophobic, which Casey insisted the Met deserved.

However, London Mayor Sadiq Khan, who helped hire Sir Mark – and could fire him – made it clear the commissioner agreed with Baroness Casey’s verdict.

After the report was released, Sir Mark said “institutional” was political language so he was not going to use it, but he accepted “we have racists, misogynists…systematic failings, management failings, cultural failings”.

A few months after the report, Sir Mark launched a two-year £366m plan to overhaul the Met, including increased emphasis on neighbourhood policing to rebuild public trust and plans to recruit 500 more community support officers and an extra 565 people to work with teams investigating domestic violence, sexual offences and child sexual abuse and exploitation.

Watch the full interview on Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips from 8.30am on Sunday.

Continue Reading

Politics

Unite votes to suspend Angela Rayner over Birmingham bin strike

Published

on

By

Unite votes to suspend Angela Rayner over Birmingham bin strike

Labour’s largest union donor, Unite, has voted to suspend Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner over her role in the Birmingham bin strike row.

Members of the trade union, one of the UK’s largest, also “overwhelmingly” voted to “re-examine its relationship” with Labour over the issue.

They said Ms Rayner, who is also housing, communities and local government secretary, Birmingham Council’s leader, John Cotton, and other Labour councillors had been suspended for “bringing the union into disrepute”.

There was confusion over Ms Rayner’s membership of Unite, with her office having said she was no longer a member and resigned months ago and therefore could not be suspended.

But Unite said she was registered as a member. Parliament’s latest register of interests had her down as a member in May.

Politics latest: Italy and other EU countries have ‘huge doubts’ about legality of UK migrant deal

The union said an emergency motion was put to members at its policy conference in Brighton on Friday.

More on Angela Rayner

Unite is one of the Labour Party’s largest union donors, donating £414,610 in the first quarter of 2025 – the highest amount in that period by a union, company or individual.

The union condemned Birmingham’s Labour council and the government for “attacking the bin workers”.

Mountains of rubbish have been piling up in the city since January after workers first went on strike over changes to their pay, with all-out strike action starting in March. An agreement has still not been made.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Rat catcher tackling Birmingham’s bins problem

Ms Rayner and the councillors had their membership suspended for “effectively firing and rehiring the workers, who are striking over pay cuts of up to £8,000”, the union added.

‘Missing in action’

General secretary Sharon Graham told Sky News on Saturday morning: “Angela Rayner, who has the power to solve this dispute, has been missing in action, has not been involved, is refusing to come to the table.”

She had earlier said: “Unite is crystal clear, it will call out bad employers regardless of the colour of their rosette.

“Angela Rayner has had every opportunity to intervene and resolve this dispute but has instead backed a rogue council that has peddled lies and smeared its workers fighting huge pay cuts.

“The disgraceful actions of the government and a so-called Labour council, is essentially fire and rehire and makes a joke of the Employment Relations Act promises.

“People up and down the country are asking whose side is the Labour government on and coming up with the answer not workers.”

SN pics from 10/04/25 Tyseley Lane, Tyseley, Birmingham showing some rubbish piling up because of bin strikes
Image:
Piles of rubbish built up around Birmingham because of the strike over pay

Sir Keir Starmer’s spokesman said the government’s “priority is and always has been the residents of Birmingham”.

He said the decision by Unite workers to go on strike had “caused disruption” to the city.

“We’ve worked to clean up streets and remain in close contact with the council […] as we support its recovery,” he added.

A total of 800 Unite delegates voted on the motion.

Continue Reading

Politics

Binance’s CZ threatens to sue Bloomberg over Trump stablecoin report

Published

on

By

Binance’s CZ threatens to sue Bloomberg over Trump stablecoin report

Binance’s CZ threatens to sue Bloomberg over Trump stablecoin report

Binance co-founder CZ has dismissed a Bloomberg report linking him to the Trump-backed USD1 stablecoin, threatening legal action over alleged defamation.

Continue Reading

Trending