This article titled “Funding older people’s care: there’s no ‘sticking plaster solution’” was written by David Brindle, for The Guardian on Tuesday 21st February 2012 13.59 UTC

Any day now, David Cameron will decide on Dilnot. The verdict on whether the government is to go ahead with reform of long-term care funding, as recommended by a commission headed by economist Andrew Dilnot, rests formally with the coalition cabinet, but the key to that will be the prime minister’s instinct. And Michelle Mitchell is worried.

“I’m fearful that there is growing scepticism within government about the need for radical reform,” says Mitchell, newly appointed charity director general of Age UK, the charity and social enterprise that dominates the older people’s sector. “It’s our job to continue to make the case and persuade them that they must take on the recommendations of the Dilnot commission, and of the Law Commission, and seriously address the underfunding that exists in social care in England at the moment.”

Age UK is engaged with others in the Care and Support Alliance, a grouping of more than 50 social care organisations, in making the case “in public and behind the scenes”, she says. Although she has not met Cameron since he entered No 10, she is in touch with “people around him”. It is, she thinks, “all still to play for”.

Working behind the scenes is Mitchell’s forte. Her background in lobbying has played no small part in a growing list of successes being notched up by Age UK, most notably last autumn’s abolition of the default retirement age after a four-year campaign by the charity and its predecessor organisations Age Concern England and Help the Aged. The challenge in her new role will be to demonstrate an equal strength in leadership.

The Dilnot issue presents an early and vital test: if Cameron shelves the recommendations, costing an initial £1.7bn a year and based on a cap of perhaps £35,000 on the liability of older and disabled people for lifetime care costs, Mitchell will need to articulate the care sector’s anger. She assumes we will learn “sooner rather than later” which way the wind is blowing.

At the same time, though, she will need to continue pressing effectively on the content of the social care white paper, following hard on the heels of the health and social care bill still inching through parliament. The white paper, which has been decoupled from the funding issue and is expected in June, will among other things take on the Law Commission’s proposals for root-and-branch reform of legislation fundamentally unchanged since 1948. Fury over any rejection of Dilnot risks undermining this delicate lobbying task.

“There is a danger that the government moves towards watering down the Dilnot proposals, or binning them, and goes forward with a quick-fit solution, seeking to put a sticking plaster on the sore that is care and support in England,” says Mitchell. “If we as an alliance felt that was the only thing on the table, I’m sure we would be assertive in our views about what we thought about that. But we can cross that bridge when we get to it.”

In her new job, Mitchell is taking on responsibility for all Age UK’s domestic charitable activity including its substantial services portfolio offering support such as personal alarms, handyperson jobs and care worker training. She will sit alongside six other Age UK group directors all of whom (unlike her) earn six-figure salaries, and will report to group chief executive Tom Wright. But she will be very much the charity’s public face.

Age UK was registered three years ago this week, formed through the merger of Age Concern England and Help the Aged. The organisation has an income of £156m, dwarfing other charities in the older people’s sector, and its reliance on commercial revenue – its voluntary income amounts to only £47m of the total – is controversial. Some critics say that by selling older people goods and services, including insurance, energy supply and financial products, it risks conflicts of interest.

The new organisation’s early days were tainted also by criticism from some local Age Concern groups – independent charities within a federal structure – which were reluctant to rebrand and sign legal partnership agreements. Nine big groups, including Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester and Hampshire, have stayed out. But 169 groups, covering 90% of England, have signed up. Others are now being invited to become “friends” of Age UK, as distinct from brand partners, and will be allowed to keep the Age Concern name. Close observers of the new charity reckon it has weathered the storm.

Mitchell thinks things have bedded down well. Citing a new member of staff’s observation that “nobody ever talks about the old way of doing things”, she says: “In what has been a relatively short period of time, we feel Age UK has become one organisation with a common cause.”

She is ready, too, with a justification of Age UK’s commercial activity. Reaching out to influence the business sector and markets is an essential third leg of the group’s strategy, alongside campaigning and service delivery, she argues. And the income it brings is a game-changer. “Having a diverse funding base is absolutely central to what we do,” she says, “because it enables us to have the autonomy, freedom and independence to pursue the issues that older people tell us are the most important to them.”

Mitchell is careful, however, to couch Age UK’s work on Dilnot and the wider social care “crisis”, as she puts it, strictly in the broader context of its membership of the Care and Support Alliance. This is significant, as the charity and its predecessors have not always been seen by others as good team players.

Seeming to recognise this, Mitchell says: “We are a large, well resourced organisation and I think we have a responsibility to work collaboratively with people. That’s a defining principle about how we are seeking to do things. I hope people would report that things are getting better in that respect.”

With Age UK appearing to find its stride, the question arises as to whether a mass movement of older people can ever be created in Britain – and whether Age UK might lead it. Mitchell plays down the suggestion, arguing that as the British tend not to identify with each other on age lines, and as older people do not share common interests, “I don’t see in the short term an army of older people marching over the horizon”.

She is lukewarm, too, on the idea of an older people’s commissioner for England, as called for forcefully in the Guardian last week by Joan Bakewell. Age UK is “broadly supportive” of the role as it has developed in Wales, Mitchell says, but she adds: “For us it’s not just about having a commissioner; it’s about ensuring that older people’s issues are central to the mainstream – not only the government agenda, but business and the public sector as a whole.”

Mitchell is described by those who know her as formidably determined, but methodical and rigorously evidence-based in her approach. She admits to being “very focused on results”, but insists she is “hugely passionate” about older people’s wellbeing. In the coming weeks, she may be called upon to show rather more of that passion.

Curriculum vitae

Age 39.

Status Partner, two pre-school age children.

Lives Balham, south London.

Education Sutton high comprehensive school, Ellesmere Port; University of Manchester, BA economics; Birkbeck, University of London, MA politics and administration; Insead business school, France, international executive programme.

Career 2012-present: charity director general, Age UK; 2010-12: charity director, Age UK; 2002-10: Age Concern England (2007-10: communications director, 2006-07: deputy communications director, 2002-06: head of public affairs); 2000-02: government affairs adviser, NSPCC; 1997-2000: head of parliamentary unit, Charter 88; 1994-97: research assistant to Donald Dewar, Labour party chief whip.

Public life 2002-08: trustee, Fawcett Society (chair 2005-08).

Interests “Zero free time”.

• The main article above was corrected on 27 February 2012 because it said that Michelle Mitchell, charity director general at Age UK, earns a six-figure salary. Age UK has asked us to make clear that this is not so.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “Halifax raises mortgage concerns with cap increase on standard variable rate” was written by Mark King, for guardian.co.uk on Tuesday 28th February 2012 12.13 UTC

Thousands of Halifax customers could see their mortgage payments rise after the high street lender said it is to increase the cap on its standard variable mortgage (SVR) rate from 3% above bank base rate to 3.75% from 31 March 2012.

The bank, part of the Lloyds Banking Group, which also includes Lloyds, and Cheltenham & Gloucester, has written to 40,000 borrowers who took out a mortgage before September 2007 and have some of their borrowing on the SVR and some on another product with an early repayment charge on it, to inform them of the move.

It said the change would not affect the amount customers paid – currently 3.5% – but the last time it raised the cap it increased its SVR just three months later. In February 2011, the bank was forced to write to 600,000 customers – and repay up to 300,000 of them – after it failed to properly notify customers of a change in the SVR cap from 2% above base rate to 3%. It said its mortgage terms and conditions allowed it to do this and the Financial Services Authority (FSA) did not take enforcement action against the bank.

Andrew Montlake of adviser Coreco Group said the news would cause worry for households already facing pressure on their finances: “For some, low interest rates are essential to keep meeting the monthly payments in these difficult times and if Halifax raise their rates too early this could cause more issues.”

Mark Harris, chief executive of broker at SPF Private Clients, said: “It looks as though Halifax customers currently enjoying one of the cheapest SVRs, at 3.5%, will soon be paying more for their mortgage.

“Customers who thought they were protected by the cap will be angry about this move but it is sadly inevitable that Halifax would want to improve margins on its SVR. Borrowers should check whether they would now be better off remortgaging, particularly if they have significant equity in their home.”

While the Bank of England base rate has remained at just 0.5% for three years, over the last six months lenders have faced an increase in the costs they incur when borrowing money on the global money markets to fund their lending.

Stuart Gregory of Lentune Mortgage Consultancy believes other lenders will raise their SVR as they scrabble to cover the increased costs. “In the same fashion that we’ve seen many lenders now making changes to the criteria around interest-only mortgages, this will be the start of other lenders following suit.

“It will worry a lot of borrowers, especially those who went onto the low standard SVR after their deal expired, but have since seen any financial gain wiped out by a lack of wage growth and other costs, such as utility bills, rising in the meantime. I think there will be a lot more people in financial difficulties in the next two years.”

Gregory said any borrowers looking to remortgage should take a long-term view. “It’s not as simple as just picking the cheapest deal anymore because many mortgages now have expensive arrangement fees, so borrowers end up paying £1,000 just to get a two-year deal that will see them doing it all over again in 18 months’ time. Homeowners should be looking at the next five years.”

A Halifax spokesman said: “This change does not affect the amount customers pay, and the SVR remains at 3.50%. We continually assess the many dynamic factors that impact mortgage pricing, and have reviewed the current cap level to ensure that it remains suitable in the current market conditions.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “Membership of workplace pensions falls below 50% for first time” was written by Graham Snowdon, for guardian.co.uk on Friday 24th February 2012 16.22 UTC

The proportion of UK employees enrolled in workplace pension schemes has fallen below 50% for the first time, official statistics show. The figures will be of deep concern to the government, already worried by the marked decline in the number of people saving for retirement.

The figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) also laid bare the pensions gulf between public and private sector workers. While overall membership of workplace pension schemes currently stands at 48% – down from 55% in 1997 – only a third of private sector workers are enrolled in a company scheme, compared with 83% of public sector workers.

Behind the fall-off in private sector pension enrolment is the decline in the number of defined benefit (final salary) schemes. A report earlier this year by the Association of Consulting Actuaries claimed that nine out of 10 private sector defined benefit schemes have been shut to new entrants, and four out of 10 are closed to future accrual.

John Ball, head of pensions at Towers Watson, said: “The government has insisted that following the Hutton reforms defined benefit pensions in the public sector are here to stay for at least another 25 years. For the overwhelming majority of private sector employees it will be a very different story.

“As the spread of defined contribution provision puts pension risks firmly on individuals’ shoulders, employees must be encouraged to take responsibility for their retirement planning and consider upping their contributions if blown off course. If everything is left on autopilot until retirement, the only things that can adjust are when you can retire and how much you have to live on when you stop working.”

From October, all employees aged 22 and over will be automatically enrolled into a retirement savings plan offered by their employer.

The government hopes this will create 9 million new savers, even though separate figures last year suggested as many as three million workers plan to opt out immediately.

Under auto-enrolment, companies will have to pay a minimum of 1% of every employee’s salary into a pension, rising to 3% by 2017. Workers will also have to pay in a portion of their salary, phased in over five years, starting at 1% and rising to 4% by 2017. The government will offer a further 1% in tax relief.

The pensions minister, Steve Webb, said the figures enforced the need for the introduction of auto-enrolment. “These figures lay bare the scale of the challenge we are facing,” Webb said. “With only 33% of people in the private sector saving in a workplace pension, we must take action to prevent a pension crisis.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “The value of advice” was written by Jill Insley, for guardian.co.uk on Monday 24th October 2011 15.45 UTC

Buying life insurance might seem as simple as comparing a list of policies and selecting the cheapest, but as this guide hopefully demonstrates, there is much more to consider than price. Different policies offer varying levels of cover, terms, waiting periods before you can make a claim and different types of payout.

It is particularly difficult to work out which critical illness insurance policy is best for your needs. Each operates in a slightly different way and covers a varying range of illnesses and conditions. People sometimes only learn they are not covered for a particular illness when they have been diagnosed with it and try to make a claim.

If you have any doubts or queries about what you need, even if it’s just a matter of working out how much cover to buy, you should seek help from a financial adviser. If your interest in insurance has been spurred by the purchase of a new house or remortgaging, your mortgage broker – such as London & Country Mortgages – may also be able to offer advice and sell you life insurance.

Alternatively, consider asking an independent financial adviser for help. These are specialist advisers able to provide information about all the insurance products (and other financial products) in the market. You can find a regulated adviser in your area by visiting the IFA Promotion website.

But if you want one who has attained the highest level of qualifications, look for those with further professional qualifications with the Personal Finance Society or the Institute of Financial Planning.

You may be concerned that an independent adviser would charge more than you are prepared to pay. But remember that you should be offered a choice of payment methods: either opt for the adviser to be paid in commission by the insurance company, or you can pay a fee yourself and have the commission rebated back to you.

In either case, the advice you receive may save you more money than the advice actually costs. And it could be worth its weight in gold if you need to claim.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.