National Assembly for Wales

Gwynedd County Council

Consultation-Proposed Domicilliary LCO Committee

The National Assembly for Wales (Legislative Competence(No.4) Order 2008

Relating to Charging for Non-Residential Social Care (Domicilliary Care)

Matters to be Addressed:

1. What are your views on the general principle that legislative competence in the area identified in Matter 15.9 be conferred on the Assembly?

2.What are your views on the terms of the proposed Order .g. are they to narrowly or broadly drawn?

3. Do you consider that the exceptional matters would hinder the effectiveness of any proposed Measures brought forward under Matter 15.9?If,so please explain why.

Comments

1. What are your views on the general principle that legislative competence in the area identified in Matter 15.9 be conferred on the Assembly?

The Council is in full agreement that legislative competence in the Matter 15.9 to cover

1. Charges for non-residential social care provided or secured by local authorities, and

2. direct payments in respect of individuals so that they, or person looking after them, may secure non -residential social care

is essential if the Assembly Government is to meet its aspirations for social care as set out in its ten year strategy.The rational set out in the consultative document is clear and convincing. It will provide the basis for fairer charging for non - residential care across Wales.

It is, however, important to highlight at this juncture that the acquiring of legislative competence by the Assembly Government in the Matter of 15.9 will need to go hand in hand with sufficient funding to local authorities to enable the provision of social care to a increasing number of potential service users. The Assembly’s intention to promote social inclusion of disabled adults and older people made vulnerable by age cannot be realized, if further limits on their power of local authorities to levy charges, has the effect of further rationing of social care through tighter eligibility thresholds.

2.What are your views on the terms of the proposed Order e.g. are they to narrowly or broadly drawn?

The proposed Order is adequate to address the current obstacles facing the Assembly Government it its intention to secure fairer-charging for non -residential care in Wales.

3. Do you consider that the exceptional matters would hinder the effectiveness of any proposed Measures brought forward under Matter 15.9?If,so please explain why.

Excepted Matter 24 Independent Living Allowance will have the effect of hindering the proposed measure brought under Matter 15.9 for the reasons set out below.

  • The ILF charging regime is dissonant with a primary objective of Fairer Charging Policy, which is to leave service users with a reasonable income and thereby promote social inclusion.
  • The impact of the ILF charging regime and its poor fit with Fairer Charging Policy and its concomitant impact on disabled service users has been set out clearly in the review report commissioned by DWP in 2006. Henwood and Hudson (2007) state;

The inconsistency between ILF and local authority charging policies was seen  by many respondents as a major anomaly that must be resolved.  The main issue is that ILF service users experience a double jeopardy of charging and are frequently required to pay more by the ILF than they are by the local authority.  Many people expressed bewilderment that their assessable income could be regarded as nil by the local authority, but that they would then face charges by the ILF (parag.4.17 page 65).  

A vignette included in the report demonstrates the impact of ILF charging and the unfair situation faced by service users who are in receipt of ILF and those who fall solely under a Fairer Charging regime of a local authority.

"Client X currently receives £200/week worth of care from social services and   is charged £25 per week for this. They apply to the ILF and are  awarded another £400 per week bringing their total care package to £600 per week. As they are on Income Support including the SDP, they will be charged £77.87  per week (i.e £31.12 plus the SDP of £46.75). The ILF will reduce this charge   by the £25 the person pays to social services, but their total charge (ie to ILF and SSD) will be £77.87.  If this client were to receive all of the £600 worth of care from social services alone they would only pay £25 per week.”

  • Gwynedd Council has actively encouraged the uptake of ILF and has one of the highest number of service users on ILF in Wales. The advent of Fairer Charging in 2002 and the subsequently improved income buffer, disability related buffer and the requirement to consider additional disability related expenses has emphasized the potentially unfair situation of those on ILF.
  • The duty placed on the local authority through s.17(3) of HASSASSAA1983 and the right to challenge a local authority  decision on  charging is relevant to those who fall  within the local  authority charging regime.The absence of such protective mechanisms in respect of  ILF service users, underlines the disadvantageous position of such persons.
  • The review recommended changes to the ILF charging regime by the end of 2008.To date there are no indication of the detail and timescale for such changes.
  • The current situation is that ILF service users in Wales are left unprotected by Fairer Charging guidance issued in Wales under s.7 of LASSA 1970.The acquiring of legislative competence in matter 15.9 will not eradicate this inconsistency. This should be of concern as the number of ILF users in Wales is 1,881(ILF Statistics June 2007)

PREPARED BY Ann N James
Policy Officer (Adult Social Services)
Gwynedd Council