Every MP is aware of the deep unfairness inherent in this country’s health and social care provision. Those with cancer, for example, are well looked after by the National Health Service. Medical care, from GP appointments to the operating theatre, is free at the point of use and usually of a high standard. Constituents with more long-term conditions, however, are not so fortunate. An elderly person with dementia, for instance, who requires long-term complex social care, may have to pay hundreds of thousands of pounds, from their own capital and retirement income, until they are down to their last £23,250. The fruits of a lifetime of hard work and careful saving can be wiped out. The powerful bequest motive that guides behaviour among all conservative-minded people is effectively demolished.

No matter how good the subsequent level of care, the financial impact on a person and their family can be devastating. It can involve the forced sale of the family home. The effects can be even more severe when a much younger person requires long-term care and finds the welfare state has turned its back.

Politically, it is by no means easy to fix this problem. We saw this in the 2017 general election, when an untested and frankly disastrous policy was launched in the Conservative manifesto – the so-called “dementia tax”. It protected some assets, admittedly, but it highlighted and confirmed the huge sums people might be forced to spend on social care. There was no sense of pooled risk, and a lottery remained for people requiring care, which depended entirely on the sort of illness or condition they faced. The public was not impressed. Worryingly, it seemed as if social care had become a “third rail” in British politics: too dangerous to touch, which perhaps explains why the Government’s long-awaited green paper on the subject has yet to surface.