UK Parliament / Open data

Equality Bill [Lords]

Proceeding contribution from Paul Burstow (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Monday, 21 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bills on Equality Bill (HL).
I could not agree more with the hon. Lady. Another Bill is coming before the House to widen the protection of vulnerable adults list in order properly to safeguard others within the system. I think that that change is a result of the recommendations of the Bichard inquiry, and I hope that the legislation goes on to the statute book at the earliest opportunity. Returning to the Leonard Cheshire Foundation case, we must deal with the restrictive interpretation of the 1998 Act. On Second Reading of Human Rights Bill, the Lord Chancellor described the Government’s intention:"““We also decided that we should apply the Bill to a wide rather than a narrow range of public authorities, so as to provide as much protection as possible to those who claim that their rights have been infringed.””—[Official Report, House of Lords, 3 November 1997; Vol. 582, c. 1232.]" The problem is that that is not happening in practice. In the care homes sector, which particularly concerns me, nine out of 10 care homes are operated in the private sector, but two thirds of the people who live in those homes are paid for by local councils. Despite the legal duty on public authorities under the National Assistance Act 1948, the 1998 Act does not apply because privately run care homes are not public authorities for the purposes of the legislation. Self-funders pay for themselves and are never assessed by the local authority. They face an even greater potential risk because there is not even the possibility of a vigilant local authority using its contracting muscle to safeguard their dignity and welfare. Two years ago, the Joint Committee on Human Rights concluded that the courts should interpret the 1998 Act more widely and agreed with the proposition that that could be done by intervening as a third party in a test case. The problem is that we are still waiting for an appropriate case to come along in order to make the Government correct the law. How much longer must older people in care homes in the private sector wait before that action is taken? It is not acceptable that some of the most vulnerable in our community are waiting for the Government to step in. I therefore hope that during the passage of the Bill some way can be found to enable legislation to be amended so that that anomaly, which the courts have brought into being, can be put right and older people can be given the protection that they deserve, whether they are in a council-run or a private sector care home. I hope that the Minister will provide reassurance on those points. The Bill is long overdue and rightly brings together all the strands of discrimination, because discrimination does not occur in a silo. Discrimination does not often occur purely on the basis of gender, sexual orientation or any other matter, and many of us have experienced multiple discrimination, which is why we need an agency that can examine such matters together. I hope that the existence of such an organisation is not too far in the future and that the right legislation will provide a comprehensive equality framework, too.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

439 c1302-3 

Session

2005-06

Chamber / Committee

House of Commons chamber
Back to top