Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 20:"Page 1, line 13, leave out ““effectiveness”” and insert ““effective implementation””" The noble Lord said: This is a very mixed group of amendments. I shall speak, first, to Amendment No. 20, which is a drafting amendment. It removes the word ““effectiveness”” from subsection (1)(d) in Clause 2 and replaces it with ““effective implementation””. So, the general function of the commissioner would read,"““keep under review the adequacy and effective implementation of law affecting the interests of older people in Wales””." I feel that the general use of the word ““effectiveness”” is too vague in terms of the commissioner’s proposed function to review the adequacy of the law, and that ““effective implementation”” is a more accurate description of how he can assess and check the working of law in Wales with regard to older people. I have a sneaking suspicion that it is not really his duty, but the duty of Ministers to review the adequacy of law as such. The law is no good unless, first, it is implemented and, secondly, implemented well. While I am on my feet, perhaps I may say a word about the two Liberal Democrat amendments—Amendments Nos. 25 and 26. They raise what I consider to be issues of great importance, the foremost being the duty of the commissioner to work towards the elimination of elder abuse. As we will no doubt refer to this issue later, I should like to commend to Members of the Committee who have not already read it the Select Committee report on elder abuse published in 1993. It highlighted the shocking statistic that more than half a million older people in England are being abused at any one time. Many people are unaware of the problem. I believe that the amendment will emphasise to people other than the commissioner the need to address that issue, and the office of the commissioner is set up to do just that. The second amendment does what I think goes unsaid. I am glad that it adds a positive, rather than a negative, spin to the duties of the commissioner and his office. It is more in line with the government document Opportunity Age and is proactive rather than reactive, as the Welsh strategy seems to be. These functions for the commissioner may have a positive effect on older people who fall below the age range currently stated in the Bill. Ensuring fair access to services would surely ensure that access is fair for those who are 45 or 50 and over, not just those who are 60 and over, as referred to specifically in the Bill. I support these amendments and that is why I have spoken to them as well as to Amendment No. 20 standing in my name. I beg to move.