Earl Howe

Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Quality

Department of Health

Richmond House

79 Whitehall

SW1A 2NS

Date: October 17^th, 2013

Ref: ML.C0044.AW.17.10.13

Dear Earl Howe,

I am writing to urge you to support the amendment to end 15-minute personal care visits when the Care Bill reaches Report Stage in the House of Lords. A number of my constituents have written to me to express their concern that such short visits do not allow elderly or disabled people to be helped to carry out all the essential daily tasks such as washing, dressing and eating, let alone be treated as human beings in need of compassion and kindness rather than as boxes to be ticked.

Local authorities have a legal duty to provide personal care to those in need of it, but due to the severity of the funding squeeze more and more are commissioning extremely short visits. I am sure you are aware of the Leonard Cheshire Disability report, 15 Minute Care, which found that 60% of local authorities now commission 15-minute visits, and the proportion of visits of 15 minutes or, shockingly, even less has risen by 15% over the past five years.

While 15-minute visits may be appropriate in some cases for checking on people or administering medication, they provide too little time for the delivery of personal care to be anything other than rushed and undignified. An amendment proposed by Baroness Meacher to Clause 5 of the Bill would ensure that home visits for personal care would last at least thirty minutes. As the 15 Minute Care report found that the average non-disabled person takes 40 minutes to get up, get dressed, eat breakfast and use the toilet, a thirty-minute slot for disabled or elderly people hardly seems excessive.

I am also concerned that, as the time care workers are currently allotted to care for people is so short, they are forced to choose between providing rushed, uncompassionate and inadequate care, or providing more care than they are paid for – in effect, working for free. Care workers are already poorly paid and are usually not compensated for travelling time. I do not feel that it is fair to push the burden of providing adequate care onto the shoulders of people who are already doing their best in an extremely demanding job for little financial reward. The Government should create an adequately funded system that is based around providing high-quality care for people who need it, rather than squeezing the most vulnerable.

I am aware that Government funding is tight, and that particularly large cuts have been inflicted on local government budgets. However, providing social care is an important investment. A third of disabled people who require social care are of working age. Providing them with adequate care allows them to work, be part of their community, and stay healthy and independent. A study conducted by Deloitte found that every pound spent on preventative and community services such as personal social care generates benefits to people, carers and local and central Government worth an average of at least £1.30.[1] Providing elderly people with care that allows them to stay independent for longer also avoids the need for more expensive residential care or crisis care. Quite apart from the human cost of denying people adequate care, it makes financial sense to help people stay independent.

Elderly and disabled people in the UK, and the hard-working people on low wages who care for them, deserve better. As my constituents pointed out, they would not be happy if their care or their relative’s was allotted only 15 minutes of someone’s time, and nor would any member of the Government. I urge you to support this amendment and help elderly and disabled people access the compassionate personal care that they need.

Yours sincerely,