Too Often The Human Cost Of Social Work Cuts Remain Hidden

Too often the human cost of cuts to social work services remains hidden. Those affected are usually vulnerable and understandably prefer to protect their anonymity, making it more difficult for councillors to see the results of their decisions and less likely that the public will object to the latest “rationalisation”.

But today a frail 98-year-old naval veteran, who is partially sighted and has suffered a stroke, is revealed as one of those to suffer from the constant demand for local authority cuts and efficiency savings. After having a home help call in twice a week for the past 10 years to help him tidy his home, read his correspondence and generally provide a link with the outside world, he has been told the service is being withdrawn.

There is no suggestion he is more able than he was 10 years ago, simply that he no longer meets the more stringent — and more rigorously applied — criteria introduced to help Highland Council tackle its social work budget deficit. The amount saved will be tiny, but every little helps when the Inverness area alone is facing a shortfall of more than £500,000.

It is easy to blame the individual officials who take what appear to be a short sighted and needlessly hard hearted decisions. But they are working under severe financial pressure within strict guidelines and may well be correct in concluding that the loss of Mr MacDonald’s home help will not result in “a significant increased risk of admission to hospital or residential care” as the latest criteria demand.

Instead it is incumbent upon councillors to take the lead and demand a change in ethos, returning to a culture that enables common sense to prevail and gives officials the scope to use their own judgement.

This may require resources, but a strong business case can be made for such an approach. In Mr MacDonald’s case the withdrawal of his home help may save money between now and the end of the financial year, but in the medium term it is likely to reduce his practical ability to lead an independent life — not to mention the psychological distress the move is clearly causing him — and ultimately increase the cost to the council.

If this really is the point we have reached, it must call into question the decision by councillors last week to peg the Council Tax rise at 2.5 per cent. If there really are no other operational savings to be made, few people would object to paying an extra £20 a year to live in a city that can afford to provide home helps for 98-year-olds.

The worry is that Mr MacDonald is not alone. Similar decisions are being taken every day across the region at who knows what cost. While councillors scrutinise each month how the budgets are performing, no-one is telling them what happens to the vulnerable people who are having their home helps or meals on wheels taken away.

We hope that by highlighting this case it will cause our representatives to stop and consider what is being done in their name.

It should also concentrate the mind of electors when approached in the coming weeks by would-be councillors and MSPs seeking their votes in May.