Clause 13
Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [Lords]
4:15 pm
Cheryl Gillan (Shadow Secretary of State for Wales, Wales; Chesham and Amersham, Conservative)
The clause gives the commissioner or a person authorised by him the power to enter premises that are not private dwellings to interview older people with their consent and in connection with the commissioner’s powers in clauses 3 or 5 to reviewthe functions of specified people. I am using the amendments to probe and elicit some answers from the Minister.
What constitutes
“a person authorised by him”—
the commissioner—in subsection (1)? Would that person have to be a member of the commissioner’s staff, or could it be any person procured by the commissioner to take part in the exercise of entering premises and interviewing an older person? What safeguards are in place to ensure that that person has received the necessary checks to be put into that position? Would it be necessary for anybody who is authorised by the commissioner to deal with such vulnerable people to have undergone Criminal Records Bureau checks or other appropriate checks?
Could the Minister then define a private dwelling? There has been some discussion about that, but we need to avoid uncertainties. Do private dwellings include privately run care homes? If a care home was owned and operated in the private sector, could an individual’s room be deemed to be a private dwelling? I hope that the Minister will give more details on how we define a private dwelling, because the power of entry is very broad. The only building or structure that cannot be entered is a private dwelling, so we need to be certain what the exact definition is.
I would like the Minister to define “reasonable time”. Subsection (3) says:
“The powers conferred by subsection (1) are exercisable at any reasonable time.”
When we read such things in legislation we need to know what is in the Minister’s mind as to what is a reasonable time. For example, an elderly person might go to bed at 9 o’clock at night, but that would be a reasonable time for me, as someone who does not go to bed until about 1 or 2 o’clock in the morning. [Laughter.] Settle down—it is because I am working very hard on the Bill. Notwithstanding that, I would like the Minister at least to explain the term “reasonable time”.
Under subsection (1)(b), the interview with the older person may take place
“if the older person consents.”
When we talk about consent, particularly that of older people, I am concerned about how we interpret it in the case of people who might at first appear to be capable of giving consent to such an interview, but who are subsequently deemed not to be so. I am thinking of elderly people who suffer from dementia and are not capable of giving that consent—or, indeed, who withhold it—but who nonetheless appear to be quite compos mentis. The Minister will be familiar with the issue, because it covers a swathe of law in other instances, but it would be interesting to hear what is in his mind in this instance.
Subsection (2) says:
“The interview must be conducted—
(a) if the older person requires another person to be present, in that other person’s presence; and
(b) otherwise in the presence of others only to the extent that the older person and the Commissioner have consented to their being present.”
Does that mean that an interview could be conducted entirely in private? If so, that would surely defeat the purpose of the interview. Because the interview is part of a quasi-judicial process, there should be an independent advocate or witness at all times. If information is adduced from an interview of an older person conducted entirely in isolation, as a one-on-one exercise, what safeguards are in place to ensure that the individual gives their consent and is in a condition to give that information?
Can someone refuse entry for reasonable cause or refuse to be interviewed? Subsection (3) says:
“The powers conferred by subsection (1) are exercisable at any reasonable time.”
Let us suppose that someone in a home in multiple occupancy had died, or was close to death. It would seem reasonable that the person in charge of the building might refuse entry to the person authorised by the commissioner. What would happen if the individual refused entry? Would that be covered by “at any reasonable time” as a defence to refusing entry and refusing to allow a person to be interviewed?
A matter that also comes under the power of entry and of interview is that of the qualifications of the person authorised by the commissioner to carry out the interview, which are crucial when older and vulnerable people are involved. I want to know what qualifications will be held by someone carrying out that function. A great deal of trust will be put in the individual concerned because he or she will have what appears to be an absolute right of entry and an absolute right to interview an older person.
I think that is all I wanted to say in this debate, but I hope that the Minister will allow me to intervene if anything else strikes me when he replies.