Boris Johnson will place a cap on the cost of social care after facing down opposition from Rishi Sunak, the Mail can reveal today.
Treasury sources said discussions about the solution to the social care crisis were now about 'the details' of how a cap would work, rather than the principle.
The Chancellor is thought to have proposed a number of alternative, cheaper ideas for meeting the Conservative manifesto commitment to finding a long-term solution to the care crisis.
But the Prime Minister has insisted on a version of the care cap first proposed by economist Andrew Dilnot a decade ago.
The PM is said to refer to the proposals as 'my plan' for fixing a crisis he first pledged to tackle almost two years ago.
The PM is said to refer to the proposals as 'my plan' for fixing a crisis he first pledged to tackle almost two years ago
A Treasury source said Mr Johnson was in 'invincible mode' on the issue, leaving the Chancellor with no choice but to find a way to make it work.
Another told the Mail: 'It is about the details now – where is the cap set? Where is the floor? And how is it going to be paid for?'
The agreement in principle paves the way for ministers to finally publish a social care plan this year, and possibly as soon as this summer.
But the PM and Chancellor still remain divided on where the cap should be set and how it should be paid for. Under the Dilnot plan, individual care costs would be capped at £45,000, with the state picking up any additional costs.
The proposal is designed to end the 'lottery' of dementia costs and help end the scandal that sees thousands of older people forced to sell their homes to pay for care.
The Chancellor (pictured) is thought to have proposed a number of alternative, cheaper ideas for meeting the Conservative manifesto commitment to finding a long-term solution to the care crisis
The PM is said to favour a cap of about £50,000. But the Treasury is understood to be pushing for the cap to be set at a higher level.
In 2015 the Treasury agreed to a cap of £75,000, and is now understood to want it set at a similar level – with inflation taken into account – of
