This Bill, as the House knows, reaches out to some of the most vulnerable people in our community. We want to ensure that they can benefit from these reforms. I can therefore confirm to the House that we will look to offer free personal care at home for those with highest needs from April 2011.
However, we have listened to local government and we have listened to the concerns expressed in another place. By accepting Lords amendment 2, and given our intention not to move the amendment in lieu, we are recognising that a new Parliament may wish to confirm the arrangements for implementing this important first step towards a future national care service. Local authorities will still have the time that they have told us they need to implement the legislation most effectively, subject to Parliamentary approval of the commencement order.
I now turn to the Lords amendments. Mr. Speaker has designated Lords amendments 1 and 4 as involving privilege because they would alter the financial arrangements made by this House. However, we wish to agree with Lords amendment 2, as this recognises the collective desire for more time to implement these measures and more time to scrutinise them. It does so by requiring a commencement order to be laid and approved by both Houses before the Act can come into force.
Lords Amendment 1, in its current wording, would delay implementation of the scheme until June 2011 at the earliest. This is because it would prevent regulations from being made until 1 April 2011 at the earliest. We therefore disagree with Lords amendment 1, because people in many places say that April 2011 implementation is what they want.
Lords Amendment 4 would insert what is known as a sunset clause, and would require the Act resulting from this Bill to lapse at the end of two years after Royal Assent unless there were regulations in force. In addition to the question of privilege, Lords amendments 1 and 4 are inappropriate and unnecessary. They seek to delay implementation of the Bill beyond what is reasonable.
Today's White Paper makes it clear that the personal care offer enabled by this Bill is an integral part of the staged route to a national care service. However, we accept that a future Parliament may want to confirm the arrangements for implementation and will therefore accept Lords amendment 2. Lords amendment 2 would require that a commencement order be made before the provisions of the Bill could come into force. Additionally, such an order would need to be approved by the affirmative procedure, with consideration in both this House and the other place. This would give adequate time for a future Parliament to consider the measures, or leave them free to put the Act into force immediately if they so wished.
This Bill has been subject to rigorous debate both in this House and in another place. By disagreeing with amendments 1 and 4 on the grounds of privilege, I am not in any way intending to criticise the quality of debate in the Lords, which was of a consistently high standard and led us to include transitional portability of assessment. I hope that these proposals now clearly show that we have tried to achieve a consensus on the way forward.
Personal Care at Home Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Phil Hope
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 30 March 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Personal Care at Home Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
508 c777-8 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 20:58:06 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_635227
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_635227
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_635227