Controversial changes to social care plan pass Commons - but only just

ITV News Political Correspondent Carl Dinnen speaks to a couple who might have to sell their home to pay for care

Despite a significant rebellion from his own MPs, Boris Johnson's much-criticised changes to social care have been approved on a day to forget for the prime minister.

The new clause in the Health and Social Care Bill, which critics say will hit the poorest hardest, passed with just 272 votes - almost 90 short of the total number of Conservative MPs.

Meanwhile 246 MPs, including 19 Tories, voted against the changes, with many arguing it could lead to people living in cheaper houses having their assets wiped out.

The rebellion capped off a day that began with the prime minister fumbling a speech at the Confederation of British Industry (CBI).

Many Tory MPs are 'very angry about what they saw as a last minute change' to the Health and Social Care Bill, ITV News Political Editor Robert Peston says

The bill calls for an £86,000 cap on how much anyone has to pay for social care - but until last week, people thought financial support from local authorities would count towards that sum.

Now under the new Clause 49, the government has removed the local authority money from the calculation, meaning many people will have to fork out £86,000 themselves.

Those with assets of less than £20,000 don't need to pay anything toward their care - up from the current threshold of £14,250.

And those with assets worth up to £100,000 can receive local authority support, up from the current threshold of £23,250.

ITV News Political Editor described the result as "another embarrassment" for the prime minister.

Labour MP Jess Phillips, who represents the Birmingham Yardley constituency, told MPs during the debate how her dad bought a house for £30,000 in "an area of Birmingham which wasn’t very trendy” after his free education.

She said his house if now worth £700,000.

She explained how her father does not feel like he deserves “to keep his wealth for his children at any greater rate than the people who live in the council house that his parents bought” in the 1980s.

Ms Phillips said: “They will subsidise the care of my father who has a £700,000 house that I don’t need to inherit.

"I am alright, I have got quite a good job. It is totally unacceptable.”

Labour MP Jess Phillips tells the Commons how the social care reforms will subsidise her father's care, even though he owns a £700,000 house

Conservative Mel Stride, who chairs the Treasury Select Committee, said he has “real concerns” about the way the new Clause 49 has been brought forward.

The MP for Central Devon said: “The first that we heard of it was not in the committee stage of this House, it was not in September when the general measures were put forward, including the taxation measures upon which we all divided and voted.

“But actually, on Wednesday evening when the amendment was actually tabled.

"Now, it was fortuitous that the Treasury Select Committee happened to have Sir Andrew Dilnot before us the very next day and we were able to discuss many of the issues inherited in New Clause 49 and, of course, a number of issues were raised to which only the government has the answers and one of them has been put forward by speaker after speaker tonight: which is what are the impact assessments associated with these measures?”

Former health secretary Matt Hancock said the social care package as a whole makes paying for social care “fairer”.

He said: “The contributions from the state, even if they’re from another part of the state like from local government, are not individuals’ care costs, and therefore it is wrong that they should contribute towards the cap."

He said local authorities can contribute different amounts to social care, and he said if the government amendment did not go through it would lead to a “postcode lottery cap in which people from poorer areas would tend to have to contribute more. That is wrong.”

He added he believes the bill is “the best possible option in the fiscal-constrained times in which we live.”

Health minister Edward Argar told MPs “no one will lose” as a result of the proposal.

Opening the debate on the new clause 49, he said: “Let me remove all doubt on this issue: no one will lose from these reforms, compared to the system we have now, and the overwhelming majority will win.

“Underpinning the reforms set out in the plan is an additional £5.4 billion over the next three years. This funding will end wholly unpredictable care costs and include at least £500 million to support the adult social care work force.”