If anyone needs a primer on elderly social care, can recommend this @CPSThinkTank primer by @JethroFElsden & Alex Morton which sets out the main options and the pros and cons thereof. (1/?)
Our conclusion was that Dilnot-style ('cap and insurance') was the cheapest - which is why Whitehall likes it - but the most politically problematic and the least likely to incentivise the creation of additional supply. 
By tweaking the 'cap' and 'floor' it is possible to make Dilnot more generous, and protect more of the family home. But that either starts to massively privilege richer families in the South-East with more valuable homes, or hugely increases the cost (or both)
Our report backed our earlier proposal with @DamianGreen to adopt a pension-style system - a decent level of care free for all, with people encouraged to contribute to topping up their care themselves (via an insurance market).
This would be more expensive than vanilla Dilnot but do more to fix the flaws in the market, and bring in extra cash on a voluntary basis.
However, it is worth noting - given @thetimes reporting today thetimes.co.uk/article/johnso… - that Damian also pointed out that there was a need to inject several billion more just to cope with current underfunding.
One of the options he put forward - which much of the media focused on - was an NI increase for over-50s. (The option under consideration now appears to be over-40s.) HMG shouuld be aware that the reaction was not good.
Anyway, we wait to see the details both of the system and the funding. But the thing our paper (and Damian's earlier paper) makes crystal clear is that are no painless options. Which is of course why it's taken so long in the first place... cps.org.uk/research/fixin…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
