Labour to omit social care reform from manifesto
and scale back Lords plans
Dismay as key proposals are downsized in order to make
election offer to voters ‘bombproof’
Toby Helm
and Michael Savage
Sun 15 Oct
2023 06.00 BST
Labour is
preparing to omit plans for large-scale reform of social care from its next
election manifesto, scale back its plans for House of Lords reform during a
first term in office, and recalibrate the way it presents its £28bn-a-year
green prosperity plan as it prepares to put a “bombproof” offer to voters
before polling day.
After a
successful conference in Liverpool last week, which resulted in the party
extending its poll lead over the Tories, shadow cabinet ministers are now
turning their minds to the precise shape of a manifesto for an election next
May or October. Senior figures said the focus would be on producing an offering
that was “affordable” in a difficult financial climate, as well as being
“credible” and “deliverable”.
The
Observer understands that Starmer’s party will avoid laying out a detailed plan
for reform of social care, and the politically nightmarish issue of how to fund
it, because it fears any proposals would be torpedoed by the Tories in the heat
of a campaign.
According
to senior party figures, Keir Starmer’s team – while committed to social care
reform – do not want to offer the Tories a target that would invite them to
attack the plans and make claims about the tax implications. Instead, there
would be a general commitment to make changes when in office.
In 2010,
Labour’s plans for funding social care were branded a “death tax” by the
Tories, and hit the party’s vote badly, while in 2017 Theresa May’s
Conservative campaign suffered irreparable damage amid accusations she was
planning a “dementia tax”.
“We need to
give ourselves cover to do reform in the manifesto, without giving the Tories a
target to attack us. We can’t allow the issue to dominate a campaign again,”
said a party source.
In his
speech to the Labour conference, shadow health secretary Wes Streeting said
there was “no solution to the crisis in the NHS that doesn’t include a plan for
social care”, but merely repeated promises to create a National Care Service
that would guarantee better pay and conditions for carers, and aim to address
recruitment and retention problems.
Inevitably,
experts and organisations that have been pushing for social care reform for
decades – and which have been dismayed by endless delays by successive
governments – are disappointed that Labour is not coming forward with more
detailed ideas.
Sally
Warren, director of policy at the King’s Fund health policy thinktank, said:
“We need to see much more detail about what both parties will do to ensure the
hundreds of thousands of people who rely on social care get the care and
support they need.
“The
Conservatives had previously committed to introducing a new cap on care costs
and making the means tests more generous, but having already delayed
implementation once until after the election, they need to confirm that they
intend to see their policy fully funded and delivered and won’t continue to
kick the can down the road.
“Labour
have so far focused their social-care policy thinking on growing and supporting
the workforce – a vital area that does need attention. However, they can’t
continue to remain silent on the vexed question of how to pay for the social
care we need in society – how to improve the quality and availability of social
care, and, crucially, how to share the costs of social care between the family
and the state.”
Several
Labour sources have also made clear that previous pledges by Starmer and his
team to abolish the House of Lords and replace it with a fully elected second
chamber would no longer be a first-term commitment. Instead, in its first years
in power, the party would focus on other legislative priorities such as its
“new deal” for working people that would ban zero-hours contracts and end
qualifying periods for basic rights such as sick pay and parental leave.
Less than a
year ago, Starmer and his team appeared committed to moving towards a fully
elected second chamber in a first term. Now several shadow cabinet sources said
there was a recognition this would cause huge constitutional upheaval and take
up too much parliamentary time.
Instead,
senior figures say Labour would look at a more limited set of changes, such as
capping the number of peers, increasing the powers of the body that oversees
appointments to prevent inappropriate people being given peerages, and possibly
getting rid of the 90 or so remaining hereditary peers, in a first term. A
fully elected second chamber would remain as a longer-term objective.
In a series
of recent speeches, the speaker of the House of Lords, former Labour MP John
McFall, has cautioned against moving too far too fast, and spoken in favour of
more “incremental” change. These warnings are understood have been taken on
board.
With the
Tories in ever deeper disarray, and the economic outlook gloomy, Starmer and
his team seem increasingly determined to rein back on big-ticket policy ideas,
particularly when they would come with a hefty price tag – even if this leaves
them open to charges that they lack vision and reforming zeal. Shadow ministers
say they have been asked to submit ideas for the next manifesto to a new “star
chamber”, chaired by shadow paymaster general Jonathan Ashworth, to check they
that are “credible, affordable, and bombproof”.
Party
officials in Liverpool were determined to avoid talk of “radicalism” and
“boldness” for fear that it would be interpreted as a sign of financial
ill-discipline.
While there
were some eyecatching policies announced – including a pledge to build 1.5m
homes, and two new new towns, as well as the creation of a Covid corruption
commissioner – the aim was more to promote a sense of responsibility than
excitement. “It is all about being seen as the grown-ups,” said a shadow minister.
“After Boris Johnson and Liz Truss, that is what the public wants. After them,
the mood is so cynical that even if we went big with promises, people would not
believe us.”
There is
also intense debate in the party about how to present its key policy pledge to
drive economic revival, deliver lower energy bills and meet green targets
through a £28bn-a-year “green prosperity plan”. This has already been trimmed
back earlier this year, with shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves saying a Labour
government would not be able to spend £28bn a year immediately but would “ramp
up” towards the figure.
In
Liverpool sources also defended themselves against Tory attacks that the plan
would mean excessive borrowing by pointing out that £10bn a year of the £28bn
was already being spent by the government – meaning only £18bn would have to be
found.
Some senior
shadow ministers also want the word “green” dropped from the plan, and to label
it instead as “Labour’s prosperity plan to boost investment and jobs”, because
party polling about its “green” messaging has not been positive.
Some Labour
MPs and frontbenchers fear the lack of radicalism and the tendency towards
caution could backfire. One frontbencher said: “I see what they are trying to
do. But there is a danger there: that the electorate don’t give us any credit
for being so cautious, and simply think we have nothing at all to say.”

Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário