Could you explain the role of Counsel and Care?

Martin Green:Counsel and Care is a national charity, which works with older people. It has several target groups, mainly people who are involved in some sort of care - so our focus is the most vulnerable older people and those who work with them.

We do several things including providing advice, information and support to people with complex care needs. We do intensive case-work and will takes issues up as far as to the ombudsman. What we then do is look at the implications of these cases and try to feed them into the policy agenda. We strive to look at the needs and experiences of older people and root our policy and research work in these experiences.

We also have a research and development function, which does research into new kinds of care. We have done work recently on Risk and Restraint in older people homes and Sexuality and Relationships. We also have a training function, which is about improving the quality of care.

Do you work closely with other charities such as Age Concern or Help the Aged?

Martin Green:In fact we do a lot of partnership working with these charities. We have good strong links with both Age Concern and Help the Aged. We have a formal partnership with Friends of the Elderly, which is a large-scale residential care provider. In general we engage in quite a lot of partnerships, for example we co-ordinate the Coalition for Quality in Care initiative, which has 25 charities trying to lobby for improved care standards. So partnerships are very much at the centre of our work.

Do you find that the government pay more attention when the elderly lobby works together?

Martin Green:I think they do pay more attention to co-ordinated campaigns. However, I also think that Charities should define their own particular areas of expertise and then they should lobby on that as an independent force thereby developing a two pronged approach.

Why do you think that the elderly should receive free long-term care?

Martin Green:I think its important first of all in terms of continuity in the United Kingdom. We've got a situation where devolution has affected the whole of the government's strategy of trying to get consistency into the care system. So it's about the fact that there is not equity and people in England are being discriminated against compared to people in other counties of the UK.

The second point we want to make is that when there is pressure on resources, what people need to do is prioritise. They need to push older people's needs higher up the agenda and its very interesting if you do comparisons with other groups and look at, for example, how much local authorities will pay for an older person in a care home, compared to a younger person in a residential placement. There is a huge gap between the two and what we need is a more equitable share and an end to age discrimination.

What was your reaction to the government's decision to delay implementing care standards?

Martin Green:We were annoyed about the fact that initially there was a delay in the delivery of care standards. But worse was to come, once the care standards were agreed. The government has now decided to bow to pressure and significantly reduce the standards. The sad thing is that the standards went through a long process to get all the stakeholders to agree to them, but when they came into being, within a few months we had the minister giving guidance advising a very softly-softly approach to implement the standards. The new revised standard will lead to a two-tier care home system - some complying with the standards and some them not.

There is a serious issue about consistency. The government set up the Care StandardsCommission and developed the care standards act to try and get kind of some consistency into the sector and that's not happening now.

How do you think you can persuade the government to alter their course?

Martin Green:I think we just have to put the reasoned argument around the quality of care issue and also around the fact that there should be an expectation about the type of treatment older people have a right to receive.

I certainly don't think it is at all appropriate for people to share rooms in this day and age. And I think there should be some really clear guidelines around space, around room sharing and around the dignity that older people should have when they are in residential homes.

Do you think the issue of care for the elderly as a whole is something that the government hasn't really delivered on?

I think its quite interesting because on some levels they have come up with the goods and the care standards act is a good example of something they did that went through a process of negotiation and when the process was about to be implemented they backtracked on it. And so in lots of ways, their own position undermines what they're trying to do, and seriously undermines they're credibility.

They've been subject to a lot of lobbying from particular interest groups, such as care home owners, who have frightened them into believing the standards would force many homes to close. The issue there is that there are a lot of factors precipitating closures and I would argue that the care standards are not the main one. The real issue is about the fact that local authorities are not paying enough for care and that businesses are not viable. The government should look at this in the long term and say that we must resource this sector properly.

Do local authorities have sufficient funds for their services for pensioners or are they spending it unwisely?

Martin Green:Well I think it's patchy. Councils generally will say they haven't got enough resources, but some councils manage much better than others to deliver on an agenda for older people. There is still an issue about inconsistency in the system. I think there's an issue particularly about how the social services inspectorate inspects authorities and within the issue of care they need to be inspecting the commissioning strategy as well as the service delivery because that has a big impact on the type services and the quality.

So I'd like to see much more joined up thinking in terms of things like the resource levels, the inspection regime, the commissioning regime, all these things need to be brought together much more effectively than they are now.

The governments' choice directive under the 'Care in the Community' Programme provides the individual with the right to choose their preferred Care Home. Was this something you welcomed?

In fact the choice directive is one of the major areas of concern for us at the moment. When we are dealing with individual cases on our advice line, we're finding lots of authorities that are not following this directive.

The bottom line is that people are getting less and less choice and the directive needs to be backed up by some seriously tough recommendations from the government and a proper publicity campaign which gives people an understanding of what their rights are in relation to choice. Because when you're making decisions about entry into a care home, you're at your most vulnerable and won't be in a position to be able to protest.

The other issue of concern is the fact that increasingly there isn't lots of choice, not least because the sector is contracting. I believe this is directly because of under funding and the government also needs to address this.

What was your view on the Queen's Speech?

Martin Green:I'd have liked to see much more of a higher profile for older people's issues, particularly relating to care and access. I do not believe the proposal to fine Local Authorities over slow discharge will do much to improve care, in fact I believe it will deliver some very inappropriate discharges.

Do you think that the government have been sidetracked from sorting out the care issue by other events or issues such as Iraq?

Martin Green:I think that nobody can use the excuse of not having the time when they're in government. What you have to do is use your resources effectively. This government has done several things that have been very beneficial for older people. For example, the development of the Better Government Pilots did a lot to increase the profile of older people and engage their issues. The appointment of Ian McCartney, who has a ministerial role which to oversee and ensure that older people's issues are carried through government and the needs of older people are at the centre of all the different departments, has also been very useful.

I think that one of the things that needs to happen is that those structures already in place need to be checked against some very serious outcome measures and we need to be very clear about what we want to achieve, and how we will monitor the progress towards our goals.

What are your major aims for the coming 12 months?

Martin Green:Our major priorities are to get the care standards act implemented in full, to bring the issue of vetting of care staff back on the agenda and to work hard to see the NSF really starts to have an impact on health services for older people. These priorities are about ensuring the most vulnerable older people are protected.

Outside this, we want to raise the issue of the funding of care, and of where older people should sit in the list of priorities. We want to try and notch them significantly higher on the agenda.

Why do you think they need to be raised from where they are now?

Martin Green:I think it's a combination of factors. I think they are very vulnerable when in need of care, so they're not vocal. They are also not a group that attracts a huge amount of attention from the media, though this is beginning to change - it is my hope that this will lead to greater interest from the government.