Care England, a representative body for independent care providers, this week (March 24) “instructed Aston Brooke Solicitors...to begin a judicial review on the imposition of higher employer National Insurance Contributions (NICs)”.
The body said this was “in response to” MPs’ rejection of an amendment of the NICs bill last week – which would have exempted pharmacies, social care providers and other NHS services from the impending hike in employer contributions.
Among those who voted against the exemption were pharmacy minister Stephen Kinnock and both pharmacist MPs – Sadik Al-Hassan and Taiwo Owatemi .
Read more: BREAKING: MPs reject pharmacy national insurance rise exemption
Care England chief executive Professor Martin Green said that “it is clear that the government is not listening to the sector and has not acknowledged the body of evidence that shows the enormous impact these charges will have”.
“Since it took power, this government has delivered a series of blows to the care sector and there is a fundamental lack of understanding about the importance of our sector and its social and economic contribution to local communities,” he added.
“Brink of bankruptcy”
“The Chancellor said that she delivered a budget for growth, but her actions in imposing increases in NICs will leave many organisations on the brink of bankruptcy,” Green continued, adding that it will “make a mockery” of the government’s commitment not to increase taxes for working people.
“It is clear that this government will not listen to the considered advice of the House of Lords, so our last resort is to call them to account through the courts,” he said.
Meanwhile, the House of Lords this week (March 24) tabled yet another motion to enable the exemption of pharmacies from the increase in employer NICs.
Read more: Pharmacist MPs and minister vote down NICs hike exemption
Proposed by Liberal Democrat Lords spokesperson for health Lord Scriven, the motion would “introduce a regulation-making power to allow the government, at a later stage, to exempt social care, pharmacists and other NHS services included in [the] original amendment”.
According to a Lords spokesperson, this motion differs slightly to the rejected amendment in that rather than directly exempting pharmacists from the changes to NI in the bill, it gives the Secretary of State the option to exempt them by regulations if they choose.
The new amendment also includes provisions related to Northern Ireland, C+D understands.
“Fundamentally flawed”
“I do not propose this lightly,” Scriven said, “but we are so profoundly worried about the impact of the bill on the NHS and social care”.
“The government’s proposed solution—reimbursing these costs through next year’s contract negotiation—is fundamentally flawed,” he said, adding that “it could be the very issue that pushes some community pharmacists...over the edge”.
Read more: No deal! Pharmacy will not receive additional funding to cover NICs
It comes after pharmacy minister Stephen Kinnock said that the National Pharmacy Association’s (NPA) call for its 6,000 member pharmacies in England to take part in collective action from April 1 – prompted in part by the upcoming NICs hike – is “unnecessary”.
“I think that the collective action that it is taking is premature, unnecessary and detrimental to community pharmacy patients,” he said during a House of Commons debate this week.
