Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [HL]

I shall speak first to government Amendment No. 98. The intention of the Government’s amendment to Clause 14 is twofold. First, we wish to reflect the policy that the Commissioner for Older People in Wales and the Children’s Commissioner for Wales should be able to report jointly on their findings when, in relation to the same matter, they have each exercised their respective powers under their own legislation. For example, if the Commissioner for Older People were to review the effect of a local authority’s transport policy on older people in Wales, and at the same time the Children’s Commissioner for Wales were to review the effect of the transport policy on children in Wales, they should be able to issue a joint report on their findings. Secondly, we wish to ensure that the Commissioner for Older People in Wales is able to publish reports made following the discharge of his functions. The effect is to make specific provision for regulations to enable the commissioner to do that. Amendment No. 95, which stands in the name of my noble friend Lord Prys-Davies, also seeks to ensure that this is achieved, and I hope that he is content to see that his proposal has been addressed. I turn now to Amendment No. 96 in the names of the noble Lords, Lord Livsey of Talgarth and Lord Roberts of Llandudno, and Amendment No. 97 in the names of the Lord Roberts of Conwy and the Lord Luke. The Government consider Amendment No. 97 to be unnecessary because such provision could already be made under the existing regulation-making powers in Clause 14. As currently drafted, Clause 14 provides that the Assembly may make regulations about the making of reports by the commissioner following the exercise of his functions, except that of considering and making representations to the Assembly about non-devolved matters. Clause 14 also provides that the regulations may specify the persons to whom copies of the report must be sent. That could include, for example, situations where a report refers to a matter which is of interest to a UK government department—that department being a copy-recipient of the report. However, where the commissioner’s report does not touch upon a matter with obvious implications outside Wales, it is difficult to see the purpose of requiring the commissioner to send a copy of it to UK government departments. Finally, the Government, predictably, cannot accept Amendment No. 96, which once again seeks to extend the commissioner’s power and influence over non-devolved matters. The noble Lord, Lord Roberts of Conwy, and my noble friend Lord Rowlands asked what access, and what method of access, the commissioner would have to Whitehall. As is the case with the Children’s Commissioner, access to Whitehall would be freely available but through the Wales Office. I think I can say that the Children’s Commissioner would argue that that method of access has worked in an exemplary fashion.