Welfare Reform Bill

I thank all noble Lords who have supported the amendment: the noble Countess, Lady Mar, the noble Baronesses, Lady Wilkins and Lady Thomas, and the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale—support from around the Room is what we like. While I was disappointed by the Minister’s response, I was not surprised, because I have been having this conversation with both the Department of Health and the Department for Work and Pensions for some time. I suspect that the problem may not lie with the DWP but with another department, so there is work to be done in the summer. To wait until 2011 for a right to control seems a long time. Luke Clements has told me that a right to control would benefit the Law Commission, including community and social care and healthcare services, as the commission reports and reviews, because it could then come under the same architecture. For that to come along later would simply be confusing. The Law Commission would benefit from aligned legislation under the right to control. The intention to help bring the right to control up to the level of community care services intrigues me, because I do not see that the Government are well ahead of the game. When noble Lords hear my next amendment, they will understand why it is very important that we bring social care in line with this extremely new and exciting architecture. However, it will be neither new nor exciting if we do not align. I shall therefore probably come back to the amendment on Report, but, for now, I beg leave to withdraw it. Amendment 162 withdrawn. Clause 31 agreed. Clause 32 agreed.