moved Amendment No. 3:
3: Clause 3, page 3, leave out lines 28 to 33
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the Deputy Chairman’s sotto voce announcement of this amendment rather reflects my own intended speech, but whether I shall be allowed to make the speech I want to make, I do not know. We will see how we get on.
The amendment seeks to explore the issue of carers a little further. In Committee, the noble Baroness was clear about the definition which the Government intend to use to identify those who should be credited with carer contributions. She explained with understandable pride the new provisions. On these Benches, we fully support the changes. We are also glad that the Government’s original intention that these credits should be extended only to those caring for a person entitled to certain benefits has been modified to include anyone caring for more than 20 hours a week. That is a most definite improvement. However, I am concerned about how effectively these proposals are going to be implemented. Can the noble Baroness explain further how a health or social worker will be expected to calculate whether someone is caring for over 20 hours a week? What evidence will be required to prove this if the department decides to challenge a claim? Sooner or later, that will be inevitable.
As praiseworthy as the intention might be, the Government have not yet given sufficient thought to the nuts and bolts of this clause. It will not help carers, who already have unusually complicated and stressful lives, to promise them better support and then be unable to deliver. The Government must make sure that they can follow through. The only comment the Minister has given on the implementation of these provisions is a review that is being held with relevant organisations. Can she give us any more information on this consultation? How long has it been going on, when is it expected to end, and how soon can we see the proposed regulations that will implement these provisions?
On reflection, the Government’s attitude seems to be yet another repetition of the age-old formula of wanting to do something in a Bill and then some time later working out exactly how to achieve it in regulations. Members on this side are getting thoroughly fed up with this approach to legislation. I hope the noble Baroness will be able to reassure me that that is not happening on this occasion. I beg to move.
Pensions Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Skelmersdale
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 4 July 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Pensions Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
693 c1050 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:06:09 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_408046
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_408046
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_408046