Boris Johnson was seen to soften his pledge to no one having to sell their home in order to cover the cost of care, further fueling Tory anger.
The Prime Minister’s landmark plans have been at the centre of a row since last week when it emerged they would not be as generous to the less well-off as previously thought.
The House of Lords is now threatening to block the House of Commons’ Monday hurdle.
But in a move that could provoke a further backlash, Mr Johnson yesterday seemed to downgrade a commitment on protecting people’s homes.
Yesterday, the Prime Minister ran the risk of further fuelling Tory anger about social care. The Prime Minister’s landmark plans have been at the centre of a row since last week when it emerged they would not be as generous to the less well-off as previously thought
He told ministers at a Cabinet meeting that no one would be ‘forced to sell a home they or their spouse is living in as it will not be counted as an asset’. This was less categorical than his manifesto pledge at the time of the last election, when he offered a ‘guarantee’ that no one needing care would have to ‘sell their home to pay for it’.
In fact, the newly-worded pledge is similar to the current system of means testing where people’s homes are not counted as assets provided they or their partner live in it.
The Prime Minister’s official spokesman last night insisted the Government was taking the ‘correct approach’ when asked if the remarks to Cabinet were an admission some people may still have to sell their homes to pay for care.
Mr Johnson already faces a battle to get his social care reforms through Parliament after he pushed through changes that will mean far more people than expected will have to pay up to the full £86,000 cap on costs. It was thought that care costs paid to the poorer by local councils would be included in the cost limit. But they won’t.
The Government’s majority was slashed to 26 on Monday evening as Tory MPs staged a revolt over the change.
Caroline Abrahams from Age UK urged her peers last night to oppose the amendment. She said: ‘No one disputes the amendment significantly waters down the plan for a cap on catastrophic care costs, and does so in a way that protects only the better off.
‘This means the people most in need of protection against the risk of their care bills wiping out all their assets are least likely to receive it.’
Nikki da Costa, who was Mr Johnson’s director of legislative affairs in No10 until only a few months ago, warned that the back-and-forth between the Commons and Lords could drag on and will make for ‘tense handling’.
Boris Johnson “watered down” a promise no one must sell their house to pay for care.
Baroness Finlay of Llandaff said the House of Lords will scrutinise the Government’s social care reform ‘very, very carefully’. The professor of palliative medicine, a crossbencher, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: ‘We will do what the Lords does well, which is go over every line and discuss everything. We want to view the evaluation of overall funding.
‘I don’t think there will be any quick response one way or another… we will spend quite a bit of time scrutinising.’
She said the Lords could ask the Commons to ‘think again’, or ‘may come up with constructive amendments to improve what is on the table at the moment because, clearly, there’s a lot of disquiet’.
Johnson was subject to another Tory revolt last night when a former secretary of health pushed for the training of more doctors. The Health and Care Bill Amendment was supported by 18 Conservative MPs. It sought to improve workforce planning in England.
According to the division list, Jeremy Hunt (the architect of the amendment) was supported by 17 former cabinet ministers Esther McVey, Chris Grayling, and Greg Clark. But his proposal was ultimately rejected by 280 votes to 219 – a majority of 61.