Hansard

There are a large number of people whom I need to thank for their work on the bill over the past weeks and months. I thank our committee clerks and the legislation team for all their help and support. I thank the minister for his constructive approach—I believe that the bill will be better because all parties have worked together to get the best bill that we can for carers. I also thank the minister’s officials for their role in making the process work. Most of all, I thank carers groups and representatives. The many groups and individuals in the Highlands and Islands who contacted me and took the time to share their experiences with me gave me a real insight into what was needed in the bill.

In addition, I thank the national carer organisations, the members of which the minister listed, which worked closely with all parties during the process, thereby informing the debate. On a personal level, I would also like to thank Clare Lally for all her help and advice to me. She has been a star and has made the process much easier for me.

There are many aspects of the bill that we agree on, but there are still areas of disagreement, the greatest of which is the funding that is to be allocated to it, which is woefully inadequate. We are really concerned that, although the bill offers hope, it will not deliver because of the lack of funding. This year, councils are facing a cut of £0.5 billion to their budgets, and they are being forced to cut support rather than increase it. Carers tell us continually that they want more than warm words; I really hope that the bill will not be just warm words.

We need to make it clear that more funding is required to make the bill work for carers. More funding is needed for assessments, for support, for breaks and for replacement care. We are told that the estimates that have been used are wrong. The position needs to be kept under review and, when it is required, funding must be allocated to make sure that the bill works.

The bill allows local authorities to set their own criteria for who will be supported under the bill and to decide on the kind of support that will be offered. We tried to have included in the bill some national criteria for who should be given priority for support in order to ensure a minimum level of support for carers, but COSLA did not support that approach. It was clear that it wanted to support carers, whose role it really values; its concern was that funding increased services for carers would lead to cuts in service for those who are cared for because the bill is not properly funded. If support were to be cut for cared-for clients, that would simply increase the burden on carers.

Carers fear that the lack of national eligibility criteria will mean that they will experience a postcode lottery. That is the case with support for cared-for clients. Different local authorities offer different levels of service and levy different charges for those services. A care package depends on where someone lives and not on the level of support that they need. The national criteria that we tried to set were very modest. They would have guaranteed support for those in greatest need of urgent support: carers whose role is going to end or is at risk of ending because they can no longer continue without support. We all want to support carers long before they reach that stage, but surely they must be given support when they reach it. If they are not, the likelihood is that the carer and their loved one will require to be cared for by the state, and that is simply a false economy.

With the right funding, the bill could make a real difference to and change the lives of carers who look after their loved ones and who often give up their own careers and social lives to support family and friends.

Elderly parents who care for their adult children are worried sick about who will look after their children when they no longer can. We also know that there are carers as young as three years old whose lives revolve around caring for parents and siblings.

One teacher told me about a pupil in her school who was usually sleepy and unkempt. One day, he seemed a bit animated and was watching the clock with a sense of anticipation. Seeing that interest, the teacher made the most of the situation and asked him whether he was doing something nice after school. He said that he knew that there would be a delivery waiting for him when he got home. She asked what it was, expecting him to say that it was a gift from somebody who lived at a distance. He told her that it was a hoover—their hoover had broken some weeks earlier, and he had just managed to save enough money from the family budget to buy a new one. He was hoping that it would be there when he got home that night. That was the first indication that the teacher had that he was a young carer—it was the first that she knew of his caring role.

We know that carers neglect their own health because their loved one cannot be left to look after themselves in their absence. We know of carers who are abandoned in situations without any help. I have a constituent who was sent home in the middle of the night with the person he was then going to have to care for, who very suddenly could no longer walk or talk. All that he was given on discharge was a post-it note with a phone number on it—a phone number that did not lead to anybody who could provide him with any information or help at all. That was an absolutely shocking situation, and things must change. I hope that the bill will be the start of a change that will support carers.

Many of us have spoken about the role of the voluntary sector, which must be protected. Volunteers are often the only people who support carers, and their role has grown in our communities. That work is often led by carers themselves or by people who were previously carers and who have seen the gap in support—when their caring role has ended, they have come forward to provide that support to others. Carers really value those services, as they are local and the people who run them understand the situations that carers are in. Although it falls on local authorities to put the provisions of the bill in place—I am sure that it will also be up to joint boards and lead agencies in time—I very much hope that they will use the expertise in the voluntary sector and in carers groups to deliver services and support.

I conclude simply by paying tribute to the work that has been carried out by carers. They save the public purse £10.3 billion every year. What they are asking for in return is a drop in the ocean in comparison. Let us not disappoint them.