How every Cheshire MP voted on the social care bill amendment

When Boris Johnson became Prime Minister in July 2019, he promised to ‘fix the crisis in social care’.

In September, the Government said that the costs an individual would have to pay towards their care would be capped at £86,000 In England from October 2023.

However, last week, the Government announced that the cap would exclude means-tested council support payments. Critics of the amendment fear that disadvantaged people will lose out as a result.

Read more of the top stories from across Cheshire here.

On Monday night (November 22), MPs voted on the amendment to the Health and Care Bill, with the Commons voting in favour of the proposed cap by 272 votes to 246.

In Cheshire, four MPs voted in favour, while four voted against it. Three MPs did not vote, with Charlotte Nichols and Chris Matheson being paired – meaning an arrangement between two MPs of opposing parties to not vote in a particular division.

This enables an MP to be absent, for example if they’re unable to vote due to illness or they’re overseas, without affecting the result of the vote as they effectively cancel each other out.

See how your Cheshire MP voted:

  • Andy Carter (Conservative – Warrington South) – No vote recorded
  • Charlotte Nichols (Labour – Warrington North) – No vote (p aired)
  • Chris Matheson (Labour – City of Chester) – No vote (paired)
  • David Rutley (Conservative – Macclesfield) – For
  • Derek Twigg (Labour – Halton) – Against
  • Edward Timpson (Conservative – Eddisbury) – For
  • Esther McVey (Conservative – Tatton) – Against
  • Fiona Bruce (Conservative – Congleton) – For
  • Justin Madders (Labour – Ellesmere Port and Neston) – Against
  • Kieran Mullan (Conservative – Crewe and Nantwich) – For
  • Mike Amesbury (Labour – Weaver Vale) – Against

Following the vote Crewe and Nantwich Conservative MP Kieran Mullan said that the cap was a ‘major improvement to the current situation, even if there are issues with it’.

He said: “I don’t think this plan is perfect. But it fixes the central problem of protecting everyone from catastrophic care costs.

“That is a problem that multiple governments, Conservative and Labour, have tried to fix before. Every time party politics gets in the way and it falls at the first hurdle.

“So I want to get this cap over the line to give that protection to everyone. It is a major improvement to the current situation even if there are issues with it.

“Personally I am concerned that it only covers care costs, not what are called hotel costs.

“If consensus can be reached on altering it in future that will be good but I don’t want the perfect to be the enemy of the good on this one. Of course Labour have absolutely zero costed alternative ideas. As usual.”

Weaver Vale Labour MP Mike Amesbury has previously called the amendment ‘Robin Hood in reverse gear.’

Following the vote, he said: “I spoke against the amendment in the Chamber where I described it as ‘Robin Hood in reverse gear’.

“The fact that those living predominantly in the north, in properties worth £100-130,000, will be paying proportionately a lot more towards their care than those in the million-pound plus properties, largely in the south.”

Got something to say on this story? Let us know.

He added: “As a Labour MP, one of our proudest achievements in Government was the establishment of the NHS. If we are to protect and renew it then we should be looking at a National Health and Social Care Service not this fragmentation and privatisation. So I will be voting against the bill.”

Speaking in the House of Commons before yesterday’s vote, Ellesmere Port and Neston Labour MP Justin Madders said: “As my hon. Friend the Member for Weaver Vale (Mike Amesbury) said, we have a reverse Robin Hood situation.

“People on lower incomes will pay into a system that they will see little benefit from, but that will protect 90% of a property worth £1 million.

“In case hon. Members need help translating that into what it means for their constituents, I have a selection of median house prices in various constituencies across the country: in Hartlepool, the median house price is £128,000; in Bishop Auckland, it is £125,000; in Blackpool South, it is £114,000; in Stoke-on-Trent Central, it is £112,000; in Hyndburn, it is £110,000; and in Burnley, it is £99,000.

“The owners of such houses would all probably have to sell their homes under these plans.”

Cheshire Live – Cheshire