My Lords, I turn to Amendments Nos. 13 and 23, and Amendments Nos. 14, 15 and 16—all of which deal with adding a body to Schedules 2 and 3.
Amendment No. 13 stands in the names of the noble Lords, Lord Thomas of Gresford and Lord Roberts of Llandudno. As I explained in Committee on this matter, the air ambulance service and ambulance services in Wales are covered by the inclusion in the schedules of an,"““NHS Trust managing a hospital or other establishment or facility in Wales””.—[Official Report, 26/10/05; col. GC 325.]"
There seemed to be an element of doubt among your Lordships about that in Committee, but I can assure you that it is definitely the case. Therefore the amendment is unnecessary.
I absolutely accept that voluntary organisations are important, and particularly relevant to older people. However, the point I made during Grand Committee still stands. To add ““voluntary organisations”” in general to Schedule 2 or Schedule 3, as Amendment 23 proposes, would significantly alter the scope of the Bill. It would also be at odds with other commissioner or ombudsmen models, which are focused upon the accountability of bodies and persons who provide statutory services. Introducing this level of accountability and scrutiny into the voluntary sector inappropriately may discourage the provision of some voluntary services, which is certainly not our intention.
Amendment No. 14 seeks to give the Commissioner a locus in non-devolved matters. I have already stated the reasons why the Government cannot accept emendations of this nature and I do not intend to go over the matter again.
Amendment No. 15 seeks to insert police authorities into the list of bodies in Schedule 2. While I fully acknowledge the role that police authorities play in safeguarding the health and safety of older people in Wales, policy responsibility for policing in England and Wales lies with the Home Office, which also provides a substantial proportion of the funding for police authorities. As with Amendment No. 14 it would not therefore be appropriate, under the terms of the existing constitutional settlement, for police authorities to be included in Schedule 2.
The requirement that Amendment No. 16 seeks to remove is not just about making a distinction between devolved and non-devolved organisations. It is about defining the type of organisation that should be brought within the commissioner’s remit, based on the financial contribution that comes from the Assembly. Removing the requirement would enable the Assembly to add to Schedule 2 an organisation, devolved or non-devolved, that received at least half its funding on the discharge of its function in Wales from the UK Government without any requirement for consent from the relevant UK department. It would also make Clause 4(3) redundant. I hope, in the light of this rather lengthy explanation, that the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw his amendment.
Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Evans of Temple Guiting
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 9 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c699-700 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-01-26 17:10:39 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_276308
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_276308
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_276308