Boris Johnson faces another bruising Tory revolt today amid anger that the £86,000 social care cap is being watered down.

The PM is on collision course with his backbenchers again as he tries to push through an amendment that will make poorer pensioners pay more towards their bills – and potentially hit northerners harder than those who live in the south.

The government says it would cost an extra £900million a year to include council contributions in the cap calculations. 

Red Wall MPs, former ministers to the Cabinet are also among the people who threaten to disregard the whip in this critical issue.

Andrew Dilnot (the architect of the original plans) accused ministers and others of not addressing “catastrophic” costs for the less fortunate. 

It is unlikely Mr Johnson would lose the election, but it does highlight his rift with his party.

Premier is trying to contain anger at the spat with Owen Paterson, his ally in lobbying. 

Dozens of Tories are set to rebel against Boris Johnson’s plan to make elderly care reforms less generous today

Boris Johnson’s proposal to lower the amount of senior care reforms today is set for rebellion by Dozens Of Tories

The row centres on the long-promised lifetime cap, which was announced in September and which will mean pensioners never have to pay more than £86,000 in care costs.

It was thought that council care costs for poorer residents would count toward the limit. However, some small print from last week proved otherwise.

Changes will require elderly citizens to pay more for their living costs. This will adversely impact voters from the North and Midlands who were crucial to Tories’ victory in 2019. Their houses have a lower value than those of the South.

Anyone with a home worth less than £186,000 will be hit with higher care costs under the proposals, analysis carried out by Labour suggests.

This policy is sometimes called an “inheritance taxes on the North” because the average North-area house has a lower value than the one in each of the 107 localities, Labour says, and none in London or South East.

By contrast, pensioners with homes worth more than £186,000 will be unaffected.

Paul Scully (Business minister) stated that he was hopeful no-one will need to sell their home as a result of the Prime Minister’s proposals for social care, although he did not guarantee this.

Sky News reported that he said: “There will be fewer people buying houses, and hopefully none.”

When asked if some people would need to sell their houses to help pay for the care they received, Boris Johnson replied that he would. However, Scully responded: “I cannot tell you what individual are going to do.”

‘What I’m saying is the social care solution is all about getting a cap above which you do not need to pay – that gives people certainty.’

The business minister was asked again if people who are receiving care may have to make a sale under the proposed proposals. This is due to be presented to MPs Monday.

‘If you hit the cap you will not have to pay any more money for your personal care – I think that is a fair, balanced approach for taxpayers and people who are having to pay for what is a really expensive, at the moment, form of care through social care.’

While MPs are concerned about backlash from constituents who support the Government’s policies, there is also concern that No10 may be made to do a U-turn.  

Robert Buckland was a former justice secretary and became the Tory first MP to say he would vote for the Government tonight.

LBC radio interviewer, he said: “The government must look at this again. I think it’s far better to actually publish the social care White Paper first so that we can see what the new proposals are – what is the system that we’re going to be funding?’

He was asked whether other Tory MPs share his views.

Christian Wakeford was the Conservative candidate for Bury South in the last election. He said to Times Radio that he wanted to see a plan. It feels as if we didn’t have one back then, and I don’t know if we do.

“But it would be difficult to shift the goalposts, after we have already introduced this,” he said. This is especially true when the primary message for the introduction of this levy was, “You won’t need your house to care for this.”

He was asked whether he would vote in opposition to it.

Red Wall MP, another Red Wall member said that he wasn’t sure how to vote yet and that Buckland had made many of his fellow Red Wall members reconsider their support for the government.

Anyone with a home worth less than £186,000 will be hit with higher care costs under the proposals, analysis carried out by Labour suggests

Anyone with a home worth less than £186,000 will be hit with higher care costs under the proposals, analysis carried out by Labour suggests

Mel Stride of the Tory Treasury Committee has requested that the Chancellor give a breakdown before voting on the number of pensioners who will need to sell their homes as part of the new plan.

Former health secretary Jeremy Hunt stated to The Observer that the plan was not as progressive as originally proposed by Andrew Dilnot.

Damian Green, a former Cabinet minister said that he would encourage them to take a new approach.

Sajid Javid Health Secretary insisted that it was still an enormous improvement to the current system which does not have a cap on costs but has a more generous means test.

He told the BBC: ‘No one will have to pay more than £86,000, doesn’t matter who they are, where they live in the country.’

Jonathan Ashworth, Labour’s spokesperson for health, asked Red Wall MPs not to approve the Care Act Amendment today.

He claimed that government ministers had not just raised taxes on the working class but were now asking MPs for votes to elect Boris Johnson to care for those in need of pensions across North and Midlands.

“We are asking Red Wall MPs put the interests of their constituents first, and to join us in rejecting this unfair proposal. Ministers need to go back to the drawing boards and create a fairer package. 


Isn’t the social care reform a matter of months past?

Boris Johnson, who finally unveiled his long-awaited plan for reforming care for the elderly last September, vowed that he would end the ‘catastrophic expenses’ facing some pensioners. The system is less generous than we expected, however, an important fact was discovered last week.

What have you noticed?

The main element of the reformed system is a lifetime cap on care costs of £86,000. It had been assumed that the amount local authorities pay towards poorer pensioners’ care would contribute to that total – but the small print published last week reveals that only individuals’ own costs are included.

What is the point?

It means that an elderly person who has to spend a long period in residential care, even if they are receiving financial support from their local council because they have little in savings, will have to put in their own money for a lot longer before they reach the £86,000 cap.

This change will have a major impact on the following:

Experts worry that it could affect less wealthy pensioners. While those who have no savings will get their costs covered, those with houses worth just over £100,000 will get no help and face losing a far larger proportion of their assets than richer pensioners whose houses are worth more.

What has caused it to lead to a Tory rebellion against government?

Because analysis suggests that voters in the Red Wall seats in the North and Midlands – former Labour supporters who gave Boris Johnson his majority at the last general election – are the most likely to have less valuable homes and therefore face higher costs than expected.

What is the government saying?

Ministers claim that the new system will be much more fair than current ones, which would leave pensioners who have long-term care requirements facing almost unimaginable costs. They also point out that a means test is becoming much more generous, meaning that anyone with £100,000 will now get some help with their costs – up from savings of just £23,250 at present.