 House of Commons |
Session 2005 - 06 Publications on the internet Standing Committee Debates Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [Lords] |
Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [Lords] |
The Committee consisted of the following Members:Frank
Cranmer, Committee Clerk †
attended the Committee Standing Committee ATuesday 27 June 2006(Afternoon)[Hywel Williams in the Chair]Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [Lords]Clause 5Review
of
arrangements Question
proposed [this day], That the clause stand part of the
Bill. 4
pm Question
again
proposed.
The
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Nick
Ainger): Welcome to the Chair,Mr. Williams. We
dealt with quite a number of important issues this morning quite
expeditiously. I hope that we will continue in that vein this
afternoon. The hon.
Member for Chesham and Amersham (Mrs. Gillan) was asking me about the
need for timely interventions in relation to the clause. I appreciate
her point about the need to act quickly where an older person may be in
danger and about the role that whistleblowing arrangements will have in
ensuring that such information comes to light. Indeed, that is why
whistleblowing arrangements have been included in the clause.
However, the
commissioner’s review function in the clause is primarily a
strategic role designed to help to ensure that adequate arrangements
are in place for dealing with problems when they arise. This is a broad
power that will apply to many types of arrangements and in respect of a
wide range of bodies. To make action under this general power subject
to some sort of time scale would not be practical. There are a number
of existing bodies who have the responsibility for protecting older
people, such as the Care Standards Inspectorate for Wales. The role of
the commissioner is not to duplicate their ability to take direct
action, but to check that they are aware of instances of concern if
those are brought to the commissioner’s attention and that more
broadly they are fulfilling their responsibilities towards older
people. For example,
if the commissioner were to become aware that arrangements for
advocacy, whistleblowing or complaints in a care home were placing
older people at risk we would expect him to bring that to the attention
of the CSIW immediately. It would be for the CSIW to obtain the
necessary information required to assess the risk and to take the
necessary action to deal with any risk. I hope that the hon. Lady will
accept those points.
Question put and agreed
to. Clause 5
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 6 ordered to stand
part of the
Bill. Schedule
3 agreed
to.
Clause 7Power
to amend Schedule
3 Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill. Mrs.
Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham) (Con): May I welcome
you to the Chair, Mr. Williams? I gather that it is your first time in
Committee and I hope that, like your predecessor in the Chair this
morning, you will have little trouble from this Committee and your
chairmanship will sail
by. I rise briefly on
this clause to ask the Minister what, if any, barriers lie to changing
schedule 3. Obviously the Assembly may, by order, amend schedule 3, but
is there any limit to the number of times that schedule 3 can be
altered? Can it be altered as and when the Assembly believes that there
needs to be an omission or a change of description? With what frequency
is it envisaged that the power will be
used?
Nick
Ainger: Clause 7 allows the Assembly to add to, delete
from, or alter the description of persons listed in schedule 3. A
person can be a body or individual. It sets out the conditions that
must be met before a person can be added to the schedule, namely that
the person must provide a service in Wales in an area in which the
Assembly has functions. The hon. Lady asked me whether there was any
limit to the number of times or circumstances in which this can be
used. The answer is no. It just depends on whether a body or an
individual qualifies under the criteria set. They must broadly be a
public sector body with at least half of their expenditure on the
discharge of functions in Wales being met directly from payments made
by the Assembly. I can
envisage in the future new functions being given to the Assembly, or to
a new or amalgamated body. In such circumstances the power to amend
schedule 3, under clause 7, would be used. There is no limit, but those
are the conditions that would have to be met in order for clause 7 to
be used. I hope that the hon. Lady accepts that
argument. Question
put and agreed
to. Clause 7
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 8Assistance Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Mrs.
Gillan: I have a brief question about the assistance that
the commissioner may give to a person making a complaint or
representation. Will the Minister confirm that that would include
translation facilities, signing, braille or any other method of
facilitating communication that might be
necessary?
Nick
Ainger: The clause enables the Assembly to make
regulations that empower the commissioner to assist an older person in
Wales “in making a
complaint or representation to or in respect of the
Assembly”, or,
“a person providing regulated
services in Wales”,
or,
“a person mentioned in schedule
3”,
or, “a
person providing services on behalf of or under arrangements with a
person mentioned in schedule
3”. In order for that
service to be delivered, there might well be occasions when the
services to which the hon. Lady referred, such as braille, translation
and so on, would be required. I am certain that with the
Assembly’s general policy on providing assistance to those with
certain disabilities, and support for language, there will be no
problem with providing those
services.
Mrs.
Gillan: I have a question on the provision of those
services. If we were coming to the end of the financial year, and the
level of interpretation or assistance required by someone under clause
8 would be expensive, would there be any let or hindrance to the
commissioner, and would it be necessary to wait until the next
financial
year?
Nick
Ainger: No, I am certain that the financial provisions
under which the commissioner will operate will allow that facility to
be made available whatever the state of the finances or the time of the
financial year. I am absolutely certain that there will not be such a
problem. Question
put and agreed
to. Clause 8
ordered to stand part of the
Bill. Clause 9
ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause 10Examination
of
cases
Mrs.
Gillan: I beg to move amendment No. 30, in page 6, line
28, leave out ‘may' and insert
‘shall'.
The
Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the
following amendments: No. 26, in page 6, line 31, leave out subsection
(2). No. 31, in page
6, line 38, leave out ‘may' and insert
‘shall'. No.
33, in clause 15, page 9, line 4, leave out ‘may' and insert
‘shall'. No.
28, in page 9, line 6, leave out subsection
(2). No. 34, in page
9, line 9, leave out ‘may' and insert
‘shall'.
Mrs.
Gillan: It gives me great pleasure to speak to the
amendments. Clause 10 relates to the examination of cases. I can see
from the consultation document that there were obviously concerns about
that matter. I
hope that I can articulate some of those and ask the Minister to make
clear his
position. First, there
was some concern that the commissioner would be able to demand an
answer from a person. A community council was concerned that in a free
country with citizen’s rights a person should not be forced to
speak by legal coercion from the state. The council hoped that in
instances of whistleblowing, confidentiality would be of paramount
importance. Will the Minister address those
concerns? Concern was
also expressed about the powers of examination. Some respondents hoped
that the commissioner would be schooled in the rules of court procedure
or that a clerk of the court would attend to expedite powers in
connection with the examination of cases under clause
10. When the
regulations are made under clause 10, what consultation will take
place? What will the Assembly do to inform itself while making those
regulations? Will it consult widely on the detail of the regulations?
Will it, for example, consult the Law Society? What is the position on
data protection legislation and freedom of information relating to the
examination of cases under clause 10? Can a person appeal against
examination?
Amendments Nos. 33 and 34 refer
to the report that will follow the discharge of particular functions. I
should like some clarification from the Minister on what will happen
when the reports have been compiled following the discharge of the
functions referred to in clause 10. To whom will those reports be sent?
Will they be timely? What limits will be set on the time for production
of the reports, what will happen to those reports and who will respond
to them, and on what time scale?
I know that the circulation of
those reports is intended to include a list that was in the statement
of policy intentions, but will the Minister confirm that that list will
still apply when and if those organisations are required to respond to
the
reports? Mark
Williams (Ceredigion) (LD): Liberal Democrat amendment No.
26 would enable the commissioner to examine individual cases on
non-devolved matters, and amendment No. 28 would allow the commissioner
to make a report on a non-devolved matter. I do not wish to bore the
Committee any longer, so I shall not say any more. We rehearsed the
debates at length this morning, but I shall be interested to hear what
the Minister has to
say—again.
|
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2006 | Prepared 30 June 2006 |