News

To hear Gordon Brown talk you'd think we'd never had it so good. He assures us we are experiencing "the longest sustained investment in public services for a generation". No doubt that's true, but it doesn't always feel that way.

In his spending review this week, the chancellor mentioned the words "front line" at least half a dozen times in the first few minutes of his speech. But close scrutiny of his announcements suggests there is little cause for celebration among those at the sharp end of social care.


This time round, housing and the NHS appear to have won in the spending review, while civil servants and staff who throw sickies emerge among the losers. As for social services, if you believe Mr Brown it is up there on the winners' podium with plans for a 2.7 per cent rise in real terms. That's all well and good until you compare it with the 7.1 per cent increase he came up with for the NHS, which makes it look rather paltry.

The extra funding is billed as a boost for community care for older people, although it's not immediately clear how this will work. No doubt those older people who receive the new care alarms Mr Brown is promising will be delighted with them, especially if it means they can stay in their own homes. And the separate announcement of extra help for heating costs will also be welcomed. But what happens when a local authority faces the choice of raising council tax or cutting services to stay within budget?


Either course would have an adverse effect on older people, many of whom are already denied the low-level social care services that could help them maintain independent lives for longer.

Local councillors are already voicing their disappointment at the level of the settlement and are warning that tough decisions will have to be made and that "something's got to give". Unfortunately, experience tends to show that "something" is usually services for the most vulnerable, and in particular for older people.