My Lords, I confess that I was puzzled by these amendments until my noble friend patiently explained them to me. She completely persuaded me and that persuasion has been reinforced by the contributions of the noble Lord, Lord Wigley, and the noble Baroness, Lady Hollins. It seems that we are dealing here with two potentially vulnerable groups of people—those who may themselves suffer from an incapacity or disability and those who care for them—and it would be sensible to give some assurance and security to both those groups in the context of the provisions of the Bill.
The amendments suggest that the Secretary of State should publish directions to the social housing regulator. The point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Gardner, is a fair one and needs to be taken into consideration. It could well form part of the directions that might be given to the social housing regulator in terms of the standards that would be set so that, where a carer remained in a property, an alternative offer of accommodation would have to be made. I should have thought that that would meet the noble Baroness’s point.
I hope that the Government will respond positively to the amendment—if not tonight, then perhaps at Third Reading. I cannot see that it would in any way violate the thrust of the Government’s policy. I believe from the Mencap briefing that some 500,000 to 600,000 people are living with parents or carers. Presumably they would not all be eligible for security of tenure but a significant number would be, and it is right that, given the problems that they are already confronting, they should not have the added problem of feeling insecure about their future. They are an important group in the community, and the community as a whole must take responsibility for ensuring their continued security and comfort.
I hope that the noble Baroness will respond positively—if not definitively tonight, then at Third Reading. I understand that there have been discussions with the noble Lord, Lord Rix. I assume that a potential way forward would be agreed with him and I hope that we might see that way forward, if not tonight then at Third Reading. The Opposition would certainly warmly support that.
Localism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Beecham
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 5 September 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Localism Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
730 c97 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 18:16:33 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_765855
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_765855
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_765855