{
  "id": 10659474,
  "title": "A National Social Care Service would be a total disaster",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/09/29/a-national-social-care-service-would-be-a-total-disaster",
  "topic": "business",
  "section": "Business",
  "published": "2026-09-29T08:48:04.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "City AM",
    "slug": "city-am",
    "url": "https://www.cityam.com/a-national-social-care-service-would-be-a-total-disaster/"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "Even if a National Care Service did not result in efficiency losses, rationing, or increased waiting times, it would still be a bad idea, contends Kristian Niemietz. Even with the assumption that it would not lead to politicization of key decisions, the proposal would still have detrimental effects. The UK currently spends about 2.6% of GDP on social care, an amount that is relatively small compared to expenditures on pensions and healthcare. However, all three spending areas are closely linked due to demographic factors. There are few if any countries that have successfully reduced social care spending without compromising care needs. Currently, individuals with savings pay for their own care expenses until they exhaust them, at which point a means-tested safety net takes over. Local authorities receive national government transfers to cover these costs, but there is still a shortfall, as local tax-raising powers are limited. Burnham has proposed a National Care Service or one modeled on the NHS. In practice, this would likely mean nationalizing all independent social care providers, similar to how healthcare providers were nationalized in the 1940s. However, this is unlikely to happen due to logistical reasons. A more probable outcome is the creation of a single-payer system where social care is publicly funded but still privately provided. There are at least two reasons to believe that a state-funded system would be more expensive than the current one. Firstly, providing free social care without means-testing would lead to an immediate increase in demand. Secondly, there would be political lobbying for higher wages in the sector due to the presence of a political decision-maker. State monopsony power could potentially suppress wages, but given the likely political dynamics, this seems unlikely. The Labour leader's argument that care workers should be among the best-paid in the country contradicts the idea that nationalizing social care spending would suppress wages.",
  "summary": "Even if we generously assume that a National Care Service would not lead to efficiency losses, crude rationing of care services, and an explosion in waiting times, it would still be a bad idea, because it would lead to the politicisation of key decisions in the sector, says Kristian Niemietz Britain spends about 2.6 per [...]",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}