Profit coming before care?

A RECENT heart-rending report of social care failure highlights a complex and disturbing case.

Political point scoring through individual blame offers no value to that but I am mindful to other looked after children care issues.

Care of our vulnerable is fundamental to society, while its provision is an emotive topic.

Some, champion private care, others the public sector, but questions about where and how may draw name calling intended to shame.

Honesty, and collective responsibility may be helpful.

In May 2023, Gloucestershire Live reported Gloucester City Council planners’ refusal for a residential care home in Longlevens based on material considerations such as suitability of premises, noise, nuisance, loss of privacy and amenity for close proximity residents.

For an out-of-county applicant to focus on a distant suburban housing estate seemed on examination inclined toward property speculation.

Another out-of-county company was informed by Forest of Dean District Council that it could not run a scheme similar in type and setting without obtaining planning permission.

That work to convert the property appeared to continue prior to consent, raised questions regarding what informs that confidence.

Coincidentally a statement by the government minister for housing asserted: “The planning system should not be a barrier to homes for the most vulnerable children in society.”

Barrier no, informed considerations surely yes!

Planning law limits material public considerations to traffic, noise, nuisance, privacy and amenity etc.

However, a parliamentary statement led application that cites a Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) report seems a weighty political stick and disturbing proposition.

Focussing on care provision being only 20% of the market raises questions about the report’s insight regarding costs, profits, and resilience of the balancing 80% market share.

The Guardian reports a five-year rise from 120 to 1,500 severe care placements costing £10,000 per child/week.

The implied cost to councils of a three-placement facility is £1.5 million per annum. Overall, these added costs are £0.7 billion.

Budgetary impact is drastic while some financial institutions promote the business opportunity like this:

“Profits can be lucrative with each place in a children’s home worth approximately £4,000 (weekly) as of 2018/19 – and prices continue to rise”

Other ministerial comments included “right homes in the right places” and “where appropriate” suggesting focus on the care for all.

Do the current financial incentives put care or speculative profit first? P Goulding Newent