Ditch the pensions triple lock to fund care bills, urges NHS chief

THE head of the NHS has demanded the pensions triple lock and automatic free bus passes be scrapped so more money can be ploughed into elderly care.

Simon Stevens called for a ‘ new deal for retirement’ under which millions of pounds more would be diverted to fund home helps, meals on wheels and care home places.

He said it made ‘no sense’ to many older people that state pension levels were guaranteed even for the wealthy, while others were condemned to being trapped in their own homes or hospitals.

‘There is no point saying to our parents yes, you’ve got a free bus pass, if you’re not able to leave your house because you don’t have the availability of home help,’ he told MPs.

‘We’ve got to make it easier for older people to take back control of how funds are used for their own services – rather that partitioning them up in ways decided by other people.’

The triple lock, introduced by ex-prime minister David Cameron, means the state pension always goes up by inflation, average earnings growth, or 2.5 per cent – whichever is greater.

The chief executive of NHS England said he wanted to see the policy replaced with a wider ‘triple guarantee’ which, as well as shielding income, would also protect a pensioner’s right to stay in their own home and their right to decent social care. ‘We need big changes and a conversation on a new deal for retirement security in this country,’ he said.

‘You’ve got to look at the full range of services and needs that people have. We should move beyond a triple lock for pensions to a triple guarantee on retirement security, which would include income but also being able to stay in your own home and getting the care you need.’

He told MPs on the Commons communities select committee that he welcomed plans to allow town halls to increase council tax by up to £160 to pay for care – but said this funding increase was not the ‘final word’.

He also suggested that many perks for pensioners, such as free bus passes, were unsustainable when the care system was on the brink of collapse. However he insisted his proposals would not mean any protection was necessarily taken away – just that pensioners should have more choice about where they want their money to go. ‘There is no point saying we are putting all of the available increase into triple lock pensions, including for the much better off, if it means you’ve got 14 or 15 per cent of pensioners still living in poverty and not able to get the social care they need,’ he said.

Asked whether he believed the large sums spent on the triple lock should be diverted to social care, he appeared to agree.

He said: ‘We have a policy preference through the triple lock which goes in one direction, when at the same time we see this massive pressure on social care which is leaving people trapped in their own homes and hospitals. That’s a partitioning that in the view of most older people makes no sense.’