Surrey's 'care' proposals 2019-2020

This article sparked my interest and lead to a further4 hours research.
I was initially alarmed by the headline “Council says social care packages cost too much”, followed a few sentences later by the claim that the council is going to stop assessing everyone and only do assessments for those legally entitled!!! (Who is that? According to the care act , anyone can have one!)
Unfortunately the original article is very poorly written, and triplicated but nothing gets my interest going more than the smell of a cover up or subterfuge
and boy oh boy what did I find

Assessments to be self done, on line
Direct payments to be the norm, moving away from council arranged care
Family and friend carers to take on more, including managing the direct payments
Services to be provided ‘creatively’ by charities and other community providers
Locality working to stop and move to central
The list goes on and on and on

I wept

Then laughed as in the 'impact on staff assessment ’ they had identified being a carer as a ‘thing to be considered’ for staff, like age or gender (good mark) BUT the impact of having to work and travel across the whole county was deemed to be more difficult for carers, but that nothing would need doing to assist those staff who are also carers. Just identifying it would be a problem for them was enough to have covered it :unamused:

Whoever wrote the various reports, over 1000 pages in all has absolutely no idea of real world caring, none whatsoever

And saddest of all, Surrey has recently ‘consulted’ on closing some recycling centres and libraries etc but on these sweeping changes to adult social care, there was nothing

I thought I was a hardened, practical , knowledgeable carer but even I have been so so disappointed at the callous, irrelevant and downright patronising attitude and lack of professionalism in these proposals. I can see what few Social Workers there are leaving in droves. All their role will be is to point people to charities, while at the same time removing funding from those charities

Sorry for the rant, you’d have thought I’d have known better than to dare hope for sensible solutions

Had to smile … after my inbuilt alarm went off like a mini bomb !

DP’s … passing over responsibility … hugh possibility that family carers will be paid by their carees ???
( Covered in one of the two Green Paper threads … a morbid but accrurate prophecy ? )

Shades of 2010 … CarerWatch again … full sp of a meeting held , with the DWP in attendance , when our whole case was
presented … posted on another thread ( Green Paper … which one ? ) … I thought we killed that one stone dead back then … a nightmare even then … for me to find that posting for confirmation !

Surrey CC will NOT be the last … if ever introduced without a local riot , others will simply follow … as way back in 2004 when the first LA cutbacks were made … and I became a true 24 / 7 as opposed to 150 / 168 lone carer !

And … this is BEFORE that Green Paper … perhaps being a true blue CC , their bosses were tipped the wink ???

In Hampshire the NHS (Southern Health!!!) are doing a review of LD Services, in a college near Southampton over 2 weeks. I get the minutes of each day emailed to me, and then I tell them where they are going wrong in an email. BEFORE they’ve worked out what they want to achieve, their main concern is how they deal with new referrals and save time. I’ve pointed out that if they want to improve the health of those with LD, then they need to be looking at HEALTH problems, not office organisation. Hampshire County Council, quite separately, did a list of the health issues, so now I’ve sent details of this to Southern Health. Parties and Breweries come to mind.

Found part of it … CarerWatch … page 9 of the following CARERS STRATEGY / GREEN PAPER thread … our
comments on the ( Then ) new kid on the block , Direct Payments :

Rest inside the old CarerWatch site … will extract if needed … expect not ?

This is similar to where I live, you have a fall go into hospital, discharged with start if you are lucky, then basically up to you to arrange your own care.

An assessment decides how much time but then you are given a book and told to ring round, most services are contracted out provided by charitys.

In 20 years or even 10 Social Services may not exist, don’t seem to do much anyway.

Direct payments thats great if you can find the staff, but one of your staff leave its back to square one.

The new buzz word seems to be these super care homes, 50 flats built on one site, you get your own bathroom etc , own front door , with facilitys, restaurant, communal areas, care staff on site night and day.
Care at home is just minimal, everyone i know needs a lot more help but just doesn’t get it.
How is a charity suddenly be able to provide help for hundreds of elderly/disabled? But as services are cut thats exactly what they have to do.

We used to have dial a ride or something like that, a load of buses, paid drivers take you anywhere, shops, doctors, garden centre, hospital but was cut. Disabled have to rely on taxis, i don’t blame the taxi drivers but £25 to go to the hospital and back, thats half your PIP gone in one journey.

All these cuts are decided in an office 30 miles away with no idea of the impact to elderly/disabled.
And really i don’t think they do, they just jump in their car without a thought to go shopping.

Many just can’t drive or are not medically allowed to drive or just can’t afford a car.

Family and friend carers, a lot don’t have family, so how can they take on the carer role.

I would like one of these who decide to try out the system for a week, filling in long complicated forms, my mother has a degree she doesn’t understand, the benefits system, even MP’s don’t understand that.

Getting care now is difficult; but the future looks ever bleaker. Don’t the people who make these decisions realise that it will not only affect “other people” but also their rellies, friends and one day themselves?

S is here …


The new Adult Social Care Councillor for Surrey is Sinead Mooney.
It won’t hurt to write and tell her what you think!>
The more people who shake them up :smiley: the better!

Read in the paper that North Yorkshire County Council have to make 40 million pounds worth of cuts over the next 3 years.
So that’s everything, social care, education, I think a specialist school is going to be closed, roads, all services will be cut.
But who is telling them to cut? the government? but then I read that the Gov is giving 2 billion extra for Social Care but then I read 40 million worth of cuts?

So what is happening more social care or less social care?

Also , bear in mind the North / South divide here.

If Surrey are cutting back , what hope is there for much of the forgotten , former heavy industrial , areas north of that Magic
Roundabout … the M25.

A quick scan is all you need to set the picture :

Perhaps now those readers in more properous areas will start to appreciate life , as is , elsewhere in this far too divided piece
of real estate … prosperity / industrial wilderness / poverty … all under one clapped out old flag !

Even in counties like Surrey , the foodbanks have taken root … and are now growing.

Be really ironic if the number eventually exceed the number of banks ???

I do think serious questions should be asked about more money going into the system but less coming out as services.

In the Surrey case I was gobsmacked at the amount of sheer words it took to put together that papers for this week’s coming Cabinet meeting. There were over a 1000 not including annexes where the devil of the detail is buried. It must take many people to put these together . I believe too much money is going on back office and civil service type management . There are too many jobs that exist just to provide reports and words and figures, the outcome of which is predetermined . There has to be a better, more efficient way

I , for one, am getting more and more cross at how much of my council tax and government tax goes to fund self serving bureaucracy


I believe too much money is going on back office and civil service type management . There are too many jobs that exist just to provide reports and words and figures, the outcome of which is predetermined

Could not agree more !

In many ways . the management of " Non " business organisations would benefit from a hard hitting , no holds barred , truly
independent management appraisal … weed out the dead wood , then prune what’s left that compomises quick decision making and efficiency … even extend to the means of communication … software / systems … and those antiquated fax machines throughout the NHS system … are gp receptionists married to the surgery’s phone ?

In social care , how many suits are needed to say " No ? "

Choice of two threads … the newer one or the MAIN LA thread … posted on both !

( Main thread : )

The infamous " Yorkshire Men " sketch performed by the Monty Python team springs to mind … which manors have been hit hardest … yep , it’s grim up north ?

And … surprise , surprise , funding social care through LAs … oh dear , dare I mention the main GREEN PAPER thread as well ?

Interlocking … the bane of this forum !


**Council cuts have " Hit cities and north hardest. "

Cities and urban areas across Britain have been " Hit hardest " by cuts to local government funding, a report says.**


**_Centre for Cities said built-up areas lost an average of £386 per head over the past eight years.

It said councils in the north of England were " Less able to raise money locally " than those in the south.

The government has promised councils a “real-terms increase” in spending power for 2019 to 2020.

While authorities that got into severe financial difficulty, such as Northamptonshire County Council, had " Grabbed the attention ", urban areas in the north of England had seen the biggest cuts to council spending over the past eight years, Centre for Cities said.

Jobs axed

The think-tank said Barnsley was the “hardest hit” area in Britain, with 40% cuts to its day-to-day spending in 2017-18 compared to 2009-10.

Sir Stephen Houghton, leader of Barnsley Council, said the authority had lost £107m due to funding cuts and had axed four out of 10 jobs.

He added the cuts had forced the council to make “unpopular decisions” such as increasing council tax.

Mayor of Doncaster, Ros Jones, said: “The significant funding pressures in relation to adults and children’s social care needs to be addressed nationally, and not left to local authorities to address through council tax.”

Urban areas in the north of England saw their spending cut by an average of 20%, compared to 9% for those in the south-west, east and south-east of England.

Centre for Cities said Liverpool saw the largest cuts per person, losing the equivalent of £816 for every resident, although it also included neighbouring Knowsley in its analysis.

The think-tank’s analysis looked at “primary urban areas”, which are largely built-up. It found Newcastle-upon-Tyne, North Tyneside, South Tyneside and Gateshead had seen spending fall nearly 27%.

Stoke-on-Trent, together with Newcastle-under-Lyme, had seen spending fall about 24%; while Glasgow’s fall of 23% of spending included East Dunbartonshire, Renfrewshire and East Renfrewshire.

" Economically weaker "

Centre for Cities chief executive Andrew Carter said: "Councils have managed as best they can, but the continued singling-out of local government for cuts cannot continue. There is a very real risk that many of our largest councils will in the near future become little more than social care providers.

“The cities most affected are economically weaker and have been less able to absorb the loss of central government funding.”

The County Councils Network said all local authorities, not just cities and urban areas, had been affected by funding cuts as well as rising demand for services such as adult social care.

Its director Simon Edwards said: “Counties have not benefitted from higher levels of business rate income, revenue from housing growth, and much higher per-person funding for public services.”

The government said councils would share an “extra £1.3 billion” of funding from 2019 to 2020._**

Grim … and clearly shows the North / South divide … with the South still catching up.

The South has lost a finger , the North an arm ?

The main thread has followed this.

Needless to add , yet another interlocking thread … the real effect of rise in Council Tax … so far , the only remedy available to
LAs to raise monies … and the further devastation that is causing at the lower end of the income scale.

Worth repeating the words of the Major of Liverpool here … just in case some readers were not aware of them :


“Nearly 50% of our Council Tax budget is now spent on supporting the most vulnerable people in our city,” he says.

"We also have around £35m in uncollected Council Tax and about £25m of that is from people who are on benefits and who are receiving support payments from us.

“How can I take someone to court for not paying Council Tax, who is actually already on benefits that we are paying to them? It is a totally perverse situation.”

A quote that backs Mrs. A’s posting to the hilt !

Trouble is , the author … Tescos … not your local LA !

**As well as reducing its counters, Tesco said that after completing a detailed review :

“We’re talking to colleagues about changes in some of our head office teams, moving to a simpler and leaner structure, which will allow us to focus on supporting our customers.”**

If Tescos can do it , why not yer local LA and other " Non " business organisations ???

In 2019 , EVERY non business organisation needs to function on business type principles … including all supporting organisations … some charities / some " Quasi " charities / the rest … businesses masquerading as charities … for tax reasons ???

" The customer comes first … we operate around the customers’ needs ! "

( Customers ? Us …carers ? LAs and our own supporting organisations ? Oh well ,we might get there in a couple of generations time ? )