Today's statement on the draft White Paper on social care was accompanied with absolutely nothing on the key subject of funding.

......................................................................

Click here for details of BMA: “Resign, Lansley! But fix our pension deal first” - Is SOS Lansley a misunderstood genius channelling Schopenhauer?, the new issue of subscription-based Health Policy Intelligence.

......................................................................

'Caring for our future: reforming care and support' chose to ignore the Dilnot proposals being a complete package. It accepts the principle that contributions should be capped, but baulks at the £35,000 figure. The word is that £100,000 is more likely.

The debate in the House of Commons was scarcely instructed. Politicians from both side said (in terms) 'ooh, you did nothing about social care and now you're having a go at us - how ironic'. Wonderful. We needed Nye Bevan; we got Alanis Morissette.

HPI readers understand that problems in social care will present in the NHS. They will also understand that the promise by Andrew Lansley (saviour, liberator) that "no-one will be forced to sell their house in their lifetime to pay for care" is a bit meaningless. Because they aren't forced to do so already. (See also paras 7.024/5 of this, thanks to Paul Lewis of BBC Radio 4 MoneyBox Live.)

Labour MP Grahame Moriss had a good question as well, asking Our Saviour And Liberator what's the difference between the 2010-era Labour-proposed 'death tax' and this charge against estate (i.e. tax) payable on death.

Throughout the session, out leader-in-waiting Simon Burns alternated between staring fixedly at Labour frontbencher Liz Kendall and sizing up anonymity-prone Lib Dem Minister Who? Paul Burstow along the front bench. Like a stag's head that The Burns Unit might fancy for the wall of his library.