Schedule 1 - Lasting powers of attorney: formalities
Mental Capacity Bill
11:00 am
Mr Tim Boswell (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Daventry, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 70, in
schedule 1, page 35, line 3, at end insert
'(or has had it read to him)'.
I shall be even briefer. This amendment is certainly less important, but it has one or two implications for those of us who are interested in disability issues.
The eagle-eyed who have penetrated as far as the schedules, and—save the thought—have actually read them, will notice that there is an asymmetry in the requirements as to the content of instruments. They include a statement by the donor to the effect that he has read the prescribed information or a prescribed part of it, or has had it read to him, and intends to confer authority under the instrument that will include the authority to make decisions on his behalf.
The provision in the schedule that I seek to amend relates to the donee and prescribes that, as a condition, the donee should have read the prescribed information or a prescribed part of it. The Minister will know that if an exception is made in a particular case and not repeated in a second one, the legal inference to be drawn from that is that the provision omitted in the second case would not be a sufficient discharge of the obligation.
I know why the provision was so drafted, as the donor, who would have had mental capacity at the time, so we are not talking about someone who lacks capacity, might well have had some pre-existing disability of a physical nature, such as a sight impairment in particular, which made it difficult for them to read the document. Of the large number of people with visual impairments—about 1.8 million in this country—only a small proportion are Braille readers, as is the Home Secretary, as it happens. Many people might be happy for their solicitor, or whoever had drawn up the instrument, to read it out to them. That might be sensible and the least intrusive way of proceeding.
Such a provision is made for donors, which is sensible, but I cannot for the life of me see why we cannot extend a similar provision to donees. Omitting it excludes that possibility. It is perfectly reasonable for someone who is visually impaired to be given the power of attorney for a friend; it just happens that the person cannot read the documents, but he can have them read to him. Starting from the base point, the document—the instrument under which the power of attorney is conveyed—is provided for the donor to read through. That is regarded as good enough, so it seems odd not to provide it to the donee so that it can be read to him.
As the Minister knows, there are many other safeguards in the schedule. There has to be a certificate saying that the donor understands the purpose of the instruments and that there is no ''fraud or undue pressure'', and so on. The whole procedure is rather watertight. It is odd that we cannot be more flexible in respect of this matter.