Labour’s poor response to the social care crisis

By Gus Baker

Should society leave the care of the elderly and vulnerable to the whims of the free market? Does an activist state have a duty of care to those in need? Rapidly aging populations across Europe present an urgent need for social democratic parties to answer these questions – the future shape of Western welfare states will be determined by their response. Aside from the electoral imperative of winning the “grey vote”, there is an ethical imperative to show how society can deal with record numbers of people who cannot be self-sufficient at the end of their lives.

The twin crises of the care companies Southern Cross and Winterbourne View should have provided an opportunity for the Labour Party to put a compassionate case for the need for an activist state to protect the vulnerable. The former, a private healthcare company brought to the point of bankruptcy by financial speculation, shows how dangerous it can be to allow the market alone to determine the standards and existence of care. The “torture” of severely autistic patients at the Winterbourne View private hospital in Bristol shows that without proper oversight of medical facilities, accompanied by democratic accountability, the wellbeing of the vulnerable cannot be ensured.

Our party is perfectly placed to provide a positive message about the action we would take on care of the elderly. I was proud to talk to voters on the doorstep in the 2010 election about Andy Burnham’s plan for a National Care Service. The policy did not just win plaudits from the elderly worrying about their own care, but from young, aspirant families who wanted reassurance about the care of their relatives and financial burdens it might impose. With high concentrations of elderly voters across the South, it was a policy our party should have been emphasised from the highest levels in the election campaign, and one we should still focus upon today.

Instead of grasping the opportunity to articulate how Labour would put values into action, John Healey’s short statement on Southern Cross lamely mentioned that families “must be worried sick” about their relatives. It didn’t mention Labour’s manifesto commitment to a national care service or contain any reference to the Tory government’s local government cuts which will disproportionately hit the elderly and those in care. With even the Daily Mail launching attacks on the effects of financial speculation on vulnerable people, our party needs to be making waves on this issue. Our response felt less like that of an idealistic government in waiting, eager to show how we would make positive change, and more like that of a technocratic opposition, unable to connect the crisis in Southern Cross to the bigger picture of demographic change and care for the elderly.

This failure to give an adequate response to the Southern Cross or Winterbourne View scandals feeds in to the bigger problem of Labour’s “blank piece of paper” policy review. Without any alternative plans to speak of, Labour shadow ministers are stuck and unable to be heard on the issues that matter to voters. We risk becoming an irrelevance, with the media treating the Liberal Democrats as the official opposition. Telling elderly and worried voters to wait until 2014 for us to articulate what we would do for them is not a credible strategy. When Tony Blair became Labour Party leader he took on the outdated Clause IV and reaffirmed the party’s commitment to introducing the National Minimum Wage. When David Cameron became Conservative Party leader his regressive policies on marriage and inheritance tax at least gave his shadow cabinet something to talk about. Ed Miliband needs to distinguish himself on policy, and fast. We are at an impasse in the polls because we are unable to win new support on the back of saying nothing at all. Our current strategy is one which risks securing our position as the opposition, and not one which helps us gain the credibility needed for government.

Labour cannot afford to waste opportunities to articulate an alternative vision to the destructive, dogmatically individualistic agenda of the Tory government. The debate over how to provide people dignity in old age will be central to the next general election and far into the future. It is an issue where our values chime with those of the country and one where we should be winning support. We cannot oppose the Tories effectively wielding a blank piece of paper. Ed Miliband should instruct Liam Byrne to speed up the policy review and give the NPF and Labour conference a role in deciding some basic policy principles for us to campaign on.

The coalition government is weak and divided. Labour must learn to capitalise on its chances to talk about the progressive, compassionate alternative we aim to provide.