Health and Care Bill — New Clause 49 — Cap on Care Costs for charging Purposes — 22 Nov 2021 at 21:45

“secures the rights set out in”.
“in a way that they consider to be significant.”
“in a way that they consider to be significant”.
“including services provided by pharmacists for minor ailments”.
“general practitioner, GP partnership or social enterprise providing primary medical services”.
“general practitioner, GP partnership or social enterprise providing primary medical services”.
“deliver a core recommendation of the independent Dilnot Commission. It will be implemented using legislation already in place under the 2014 Care Act, which introduces the independent Dilnot Commission’s social care charging reform.”
“the wrong Bill at the wrong time.”-[Official Report, 14 July 2021; Vol. 699, c. 438.]
“We forget at our peril the added value, the accountability, the loyalty and the good will that the NHS provides. We really do…I am saying that it does matter. Your local acute trust is not there on a 10-year contract, willing to walk away after two years. It is there for your population; it cannot walk away.”––[Official Report, Health and Care Public Bill Committee, 9 September 2021; c. 90, Q113.]
“fix the crisis in social care once and for all, with a clear plan that we have prepared”.
“The change the Government has announced makes the overall scheme a lot less helpful to older people with modest assets than anyone had expected. It waters down Sir Andrew Dilnot’s original proposal to save the Government some money, but at the cost of protecting the finances of older home owners…This feels like completely the wrong policy choice and we are extremely disappointed that the Government has made it”.
“the Prime Minister’s promise that no one need sell their house to pay for care…doesn’t seem to apply to them.”
“The prerequisite of any solution will be a guarantee that no one needing care has to sell their home to pay for it.”
“that the involvement of the private sector, in all its forms, in ICBs is a matter of significant concern to Members in the House,”
“want local areas to be able to appoint members as they think appropriate.”––[Official Report, Health and Care Public Bill Committee, 14 September 2021; c. 258-259.]
“prepare a strategy…setting out how the assessed needs in relation to its area are to be met”.
“the procurement…of…health care services for the purposes of the health service”
“build a comprehensive National Care Service for England”,
“free personal care, beginning with investments to ensure that older people have their personal care needs met, with the ambition to extend this provision to all working-age adults.”
“nobody needing care should be forced to sell their home to pay for it.”
“a big change that…finds savings exclusively from the less well-off group.”
“to adopt a different approach”,
“it will be poorer pensioners who have relatively modest assets that will be most affected by these changes.”
“the NHS has saved my life, no question.”
“the whole package is a significant step forward”.
“everyday wellbeing, self-care for minor ailments and the management of long-term conditions”
“finds savings exclusively from the less well-off”.

Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit free service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your electricity and/or gas to Bulb Energy who provide 100% renewable electricity and tend to be 20% cheaper than the 'Big Six'. They'll also pay any exit fees (up to £120) from your old supplier AND give you (and us) a £50 credit for joining up via our Bulb Referral Link.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con270 (+2 tell) 18080.6%
DUP0 3037.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 60100.0%
Lab0 172 (+2 tell)087.4%
LDem0 10083.3%
PC0 2066.7%
SDLP0 20100.0%
SNP0 31068.9%
Total:270 246081.6%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

Peter AldousWaveneyConno
John BaronBasildon and BillericayConno
Philip DaviesShipleyCon (front bench)no
Chris GreenBolton WestConno
Mark HarperForest of DeanConno
Kevin HollinrakeThirsk and MaltonCon (front bench)no
Philip HolloboneKetteringCon (front bench)no
Mark JenkinsonWorkingtonCon (front bench)no
Andrew LewerNorthampton SouthCon (front bench)no
Jason McCartneyColne ValleyConno
Esther McVeyTattonCon (front bench)no
Damien MooreSouthportCon (front bench)no
Holly Mumby-CroftScunthorpeConno
Mike PenningHemel HempsteadConno
Andrew PercyBrigg and GooleCon (front bench)no
Daniel PoulterCentral Suffolk and North IpswichCon (front bench)no
Christian WakefordBury Southwhilst Con (front bench)no
William WraggHazel GroveCon (front bench)no

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive