Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 33:"Page 2, line 6, leave out paragraph (b)." The noble Lord said: This is a probing amendment on which I hope to hang a debate on how one measures whether a function has been discharged. For example, if the function of the Assembly is to promote good relations and methods of good practice, what criteria can the commissioner use to decide if the function has been discharged? When a function under the Bill is based on values and/or morals, qualitative and not quantitative targets, how can it be measured? The whole process is very subjective. Whose views will be used when the Assembly or the commissioner decides how and what ““good”” entails and whether it has been achieved? If there are different views on whether the function has failed or been successfully discharged, will the question be subject to scrutiny by a committee in the Assembly or elsewhere? Can the noble Lord explain whether the commissioner will always have the last word? If qualitative functions are set and the results are left to subjective debate with no final decision, is there any value in the commissioner being able to review and monitor such functions? These points need further clarification. Amendment No. 35 is another drafting amendment which would remove the words ““made arrangements”” from Clause 3(2) and replace it with ““contracted””. This is a simple but very important change. The use of ““contracted”” tightens up the clause, allowing it to cover work that has been formally contracted out. Can the noble Lord clarify whether the clause includes formally contracted work and, if so, who would be held to account—the main contractor, who was designated to take on the responsibility, the independent provider to whom it has been subcontracted, or yet another party? I beg to move.