Care Bill [HL]

Debate between Lord Warner and Lord Rix
Tuesday 16th July 2013

(11 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Rix Portrait Lord Rix
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

How is it that the commission found that people with disabilities and elderly people helped to make up the deficit? I would have thought that they were the very last people in this country who should forgo support from the state system.

Lord Warner Portrait Lord Warner
- Hansard - -

I do not think we want to have a debate on our report, but I suggest that the noble Lord reads Chapter 2 which sets out the arguments why we should have consistency between the two age groups and why there was a fairness issue about that. If you distinguish between the two age groups, we favoured not being over-elaborate in means-testing working age people. If the noble Lord reads Chapter 2, he will see that we have in many ways discriminated in favour of working-age people in the treatment of them under a means-tested system. We were not being hard-nosed about it; we were saying that there was a general equity issue about treating people of working age and non-working age under the same architecture in this system. I do not want to detain the Committee with the Warner standard lecture on the Dilnot commission, but I recommend to the noble Lord that he refreshes his memory on Chapter 2, which sets out our arguments.

Lord Rix Portrait Lord Rix
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I would not necessarily put working-age people at the top of the list. I talked about disabled people. I was asking how the commission found that disabled people should be called upon to provide funding to support the pay-off of the deficit.

Lord Warner Portrait Lord Warner
- Hansard - -

I do not think that we said that they should fund the deficit. We said how they should be treated under the architecture of a new system for funding care and support in the future.