Is English court ruling on unlawful reduction of adult social care a marker for Scotland?

On 11th November 2011, a day for responsible caring, a judge in the English courts ruled unlawful the plan by the council for the Isle of Wight to cut its adult social care budget.

Mrs Justice Lang considered the local authority’s intention to raise the bar on eligibility, thus reducing the availability of social care to needy adults – and ruled against the plan.

A range of senior charities concerned with the care and treatment of the vulnerable have said that the decision means that local authorities must do more than simply keeping people safe in the aftermath of the withdrawal of social care services.

They feel that councils, in consequence of this decision, are now obliged to consider issues like the prevention of neglect, access to education and support for maintaining family relationships and personal care.

The issue of making social care budget cuts by raising eligibility criteria is, of course, highly relevant in Argyll, where Argyll and Bute Council completely cut the funding to Neighbourhood Networks, source of the council’s entire social day care provision, leaving support only for immediately urgent cases.

With English law distinct from Scots Law and with social care a devolved responsibility, this legal decision, which quashed Isle of Wight Council’s action, has no authority here. However, it has clear strategic implications for how Scottish campaigners against such cuts might choose to pursue their protests.

The heart of the issue is the level of obligation the state has to disabled and vulnerable people.

It is difficult to conceive of the Scottish Government being prepared to countenance vulnerable Scots worse protected than their counterparts south of the border.