Clause 17 - Section 16 powers: personal welfare
Mental Capacity Bill
3:45 pm

Photo of Mr David Lammy

Mr David Lammy (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs; Tottenham, Labour)

We thought it would be helpful if the Bill included some examples of the sort of personal welfare decisions that the court or deputy might need to make. When such issues have arisen in the past, they have been dealt with by the High Court. The examples given in clause 17(1) of residence, contact and health care are the types of matter that come under the High Court's jurisdiction. The amendment would add another category to that list.

I appreciate that it might be useful to list a range of matters in which deputies or the court might make decisions. However, I am not convinced of the merits of setting down one particular matter—in this case, travel. It is true that, for some journeys, a deputy or the court may need to decide whether it is in the person's best interests to travel a particular distance—for example, there might be disagreement on whether he or she should stay with a relative in another part of the country. However, journeys of 10 miles or more might be frequent and routine for some, especially for those living in rural areas. It would be over-bureaucratic if a court or a deputy had always to be involved in such situations.

We indicate in clause 17(1) the important matters that, over the years, have come before the High Court. I do not want to go much beyond that. We ought to leave it to the code of practice to deal with that question. I therefore hope that the hon. Gentleman will not feel it necessary to press the point further.

Annotations

No annotations

Sign in or join to post a public annotation.