Clause 7 - Payment for necessary goods and services
Mental Capacity Bill
4:15 pm
Mr Tim Boswell (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Daventry, Conservative)
To save my having to make a point on clause stand part, I shall say now that there is a difficulty in the amendment, which is why I did not rush to move it. It creates an interesting principle whereby goods and services, whether or not they are necessities, would be charged for differentially according to the means of the person. We all know people who are relatively poorly off, and I am sure that they would like to get their milk at half price, but unless there is a specific provision—by way of tokens, vouchers or some other system—that is not how the market works. I am not sure whether the Liberal Democrats had that in mind when they tabled the amendment. Charges should be reasonable, but they should not be stepped by reference to means.
There is another separate problem with persons who may not be at arm's length from each other. If the milkman was providing the service and happened to know the family, they could—and sometimes would—charge more, rather than less, and seek to get some advantage from the situation. The common law principle probably avoids that difficulty, so that nobody would be able to rip others off in that way. Perhaps the Minister will reassure me and make me feel a bit happier about that.