I have had two meetings involving the real world of social care in the last few days, the funding of which, for those with the means, we often help to plan. Both involved residents or spouses thereof in what would be classified as top-of-the-range homes, all with great facilities and, I’m sure, staff, but in the real world no Thursday Murder Club-style red wine lunches and jolly chats. The other part of the reality is that they cost at least £1500 per week. So any talk of caps of “£40,000 on the amount anyone in England will need to spend on care in their lifetime” are not real world either. What happens then? Are they shipped out to a lower-cost “council” facility? Are they moved back to their own home with agency carers popping in? Furthermore, anyone who has been involved at the sharper end of trying to get any of this stuff sorted will know that it involves both form after form and a lengthy wait. Sorry for the doom and gloom, but it’s hard to be optimistic. Root and branch required, I’m afraid.
“Reeves backs down on plans to cut ISA limit”
So it looks as though Cash ISAs are safe for the moment (FTM – is that a thing?) Rachel has apparently ‘bowed to pressure’ from the banks and building societies and decided not to reduce the allowance to £4,000 for cash and to keep the £20,000 parity with Stocks and Shares ISAs. Bowed also to common sense, I’d say.
