But for somebody with assets who is looking to be taken care of in a residential home the incentive to dispose of their personal assets is surely going to be a great deal less than it is at the moment. I would have thought that that incentive was much greater now than it will be in the future, when we hope that there will be financial products on the market to enable people to insure up to the level of the cap. Therefore, I am not sure that I completely understand the force of the point that the noble Baroness is making. Obviously there will be some incentive for people to dispose of their assets but I suggest that it will be less than she has stated.
To move on to the noble Baroness’s Amendment 86M, there will be a dispute between a local authority and a provider as to the prices proposed or other matters. Occasionally, disputes may become intractable. Therefore, I completely understand why the noble Baroness proposes through her amendment to, in effect, require a new independent adjudicator to arbitrate in any unresolvable disputes. However, it is our view that any disputes arising as part of a contractual negotiation must be resolved through that process. Appointing or establishing a new independent adjudicator would be likely to add unnecessary cost and bureaucracy to the process of commissioning. We also believe that it will be likely to increase disputes by providing a means of challenge which would soon become a standard process.
9.15 pm
Local authority commissioning practices also have an important role to play in promoting high-quality services. We fully support the principle behind the arguments expressed today that we need to move away from overly prescriptive commissioning, which focuses on price and timeslots, to consider how local authorities can deliver better outcomes and quality care. However, although the law can set out clear principles on quality, as Clause 5 does, that alone will not tackle poor commissioning practices. The underlying causes of poor quality commissioning are systemic and cultural.
We are therefore working with the sector to bring an end to commissioning practices that undermine people’s dignity and choice, including through a homecare challenge announced recently by my honourable friend the Minister of State for Care and Support. We will also develop statutory guidance on commissioning to support local authorities to commission effectively.
I turn to the importance of the development of the care and support workforce. The Government fully support the need to raise the quality of care received by people by developing a high-quality care and support workforce. However, this is another area in which we do not believe that legislation is the most effective way of achieving our objectives.
The terms and conditions of care and support workers, including pay, are of course ultimately a matter for local employers within the existing requirements of employment legislation. However, I say to the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, that I agree that the idea of a zero-hour contract is in most circumstances completely incompatible with a model of high-quality care in which the individual really gets to know their care worker.
We are working with the sector to encourage the acquisition of skills and improve the quality of services, including through the development of a code of conduct and minimum training standards. The department has also worked with Skills for Care to develop the social care commitment to promote culture change and skills development.
My noble friend Lady Jolly asked me how quality would be assured and whether there would be a link to NICE standards. We will work with the sector to develop guidance about the duty, including how they can ensure that high-quality services are provided in their area. We are working with local authorities to support them to develop their capacity to shape local markets. We launched a programme of support last year and intend to keep working with local authorities to support their commissioning practices. However, I acknowledge that there is work to do in that area.
The noble Lord, Lord Hunt, asked about the CQC and expressed the view that it should be focusing more on the care sector and the delivery of its responsibilities. As drafted, the Bill consolidates the situation as it existed under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in terms of the CQC’s role in conducting reviews of local authority commissioning, as we covered in a previous debate. The new Chief Inspector of Adult Social Care will be working closely with local authorities as the commissioners of care and support.
I hope that I have succeeded in reassuring the Committee that the Bill already places sufficient requirements on local authorities to work with people and providers in their area to develop sustainable and high-quality markets in care and support services. That objective cannot be achieved by legislation alone, and we are therefore working with local authorities and the sector more widely to improve commissioning practices and develop a high-quality social care workforce. I respectfully ask that noble Lords do not press their amendments.