My Lords, I support the amendment, because, having read all the information from the Disability Rights Commission, I think this is an extraordinary situation. If I am wrong, I will be pleased to hear from the Minister. First, the very sensible passage of a previous Act that compelled such bodies to consult users was an excellent thought. It also reflects the human rights legislation in a number of ways, so that individuals, whether children or patients, have a right to have their views considered. Now we have a situation where those providing services actually want to involve users, whether in research, focus groups or recruitment sessions. It is a bit odd that there seems to be a difference between how local councillors are treated and how members of this group are treated. I am concerned that the very poorest users, those on means-tested benefit, are likely to suffer the worst deprivation and therefore their voices should be heard. They are disadvantaged far more than anyone else.
If the Minister was applying the councillor test in all these areas, where would there be a difference? Is there a difference in the way that some of these groups are treated? If so, why? Can it really be justified? It would be important for the debate to hear the Minister’s answer on that point.
Welfare Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Howe of Idlicote
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 19 March 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Welfare Reform Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
690 c1019-20 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:56:55 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385982
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385982
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385982