SEAMLESS

The government did not specify in September whether people receiving these payments would be able to put them towards reaching the cap.

"This is massively more generous than the previous regime," the PM said ahead of tonight's vote.

"we 're addressing a long-standing social injustice and it will benefit the people of this country."

But MPs of all parties have said those with assets between £20,000 and £100,000 will, in fact, struggle to reach the £86,000 cap so may have to sell their homes to pay for care.

Mr Scully told Sky News' Kay Burley : "There will be fewer people selling their houses and hopefully none.

"I can't tell you what individuals are going to do.

"What I'm saying is the social care solution is all about getting a cap above which you do not need to pay- that gives people certainty."

The Johnson promise that no one would have to sell their home to pay for their care was airbrushed from history.

The PM defended his plans ahead of the vote, telling the CBI annual conference they are "incredibly generous and much better than the existing system".

it is actually a care con because if you need social care and you are fortunate enough to earn a £1m house in the home counties, 90 % of your assets will be protected.

"that's not levelling up, it's daylight robbery."

Other backbench Tory MPs are expected to join him following lingering ill-feeling after being whipped to support former MP Owen Paterson in a standards row which the government then had to perform a U-turn on.

Boris Johnson has insisted his plan for social care will help tackle a "long standing social injustice" over cost.

but when the move was announced last week, it was condemned by a number of charities, saying it would offer "little protection" to those with fewer assets, as it will not count towards the cap harder to reach.

But Labour's shadow health secretary, Jonathan Ashworth, called it "daylight robbery", telling BBC Breakfast that people with fewer assets- especially in the north of the country- would end up losing a larger proportion of their wealth than better off people.

MPs will debate the new details of the plan in the Commons later.

The cap on personal care costs is a central element of the government's plans to change how adult social care in England is funded.

Questioned about the move, Mr Johnson said the new system was "progressive" and "much better" than the existing one.

"Under the existing system nobody gets any support if they have assets of £23,00 or more- now you get support if you have £100,000 or less, so we 're helping people," he said.

And it also goes against recommendations by economist Sir Andrew Dilnot, who set out the blueprint for the cap back in 2011.

He added : "Less well off people still would, if this amendment is passed, face a real catastrophe if they were one of the minority who face really big care costs ... so I think this does leave a significant hole in the overall proposal."

To some Conservative MPs who snatched their seats from Labour, that doesn't look like levelling up.

Discontent grew with the announcement that some less affluent people would have to wait longer than expected to reach the £86,000 limit.

And there are worries that Labour's narrative of "broken promises" is beginning to take hold.

With tax rises on the way before next spring's local elections, some of Boris Johnson's MPs fear a gathering political storm.

Labour has attacked the proposal and promised to vote against it when it comes to the Commons on Monday evening.

Mr Ashworth told the BBC : "They don't protect everybody from catastrophic costs.

"But if you are unfortunate enough to need social care and you live in a £80,000 house in say Barrow or Hartlepool or Mansfield, you 'll lose nearly everything.

What we now know to be a barely practical plan that will make little difference was sold as a revolution.

It is the opposite.

Someone in line for a windfall of £86,000 from the sale of a home up North will see the lot go in care costs.

They will – especially poorer people who fall victim to dementia rather than meet a swift end from cardiac arrest.

The Johnson style of government isn't working.

Johnson feels much more like a loser these days.

As someone who lived through it, this is the same argument deployed by the Thatcher government to defend the poll tax.

I wonder if, deep down, prime ministers recognise the moment their fate is sealed?

Stay up to date with our posts

Seamless Daily is an innovative news platform that is updated 24/7 to help you keep up to date with all the current events around the globe.

Our team of professional editors as well as our state-of-the-art artificial intelligence platforms ensure that our curation is accurate, fact-checked, and trustworthy.

Click here to subscribe

Read more

'Multiple people injured after car plows into crowd at Wisconsin Christmas parade'

Matt Doran: Australian TV host sorry for bungle that sank Adele interview

Migrant crossings: Number reaching UK this year three times 2020's total