Clause 24
Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Bill [Lords]
5:00 pm
Nick Ainger (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Office of the Secretary of State for Wales; Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire, Labour)
That was an issue that we addressed on Second Reading as well as in the other place, to which the hon. Member for Carmarthen, East and Dinefwr has referred extensively. Both the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham and the hon. Gentleman are right in saying that a line has to be drawn somewhere. The difficulty is in getting that right and having sufficient flexibility to address some of the concerns that the hon. Gentleman has raised.
One issue, apart from getting the age right, is making sure that the commissioner is capable of dealing with the issues that will be brought to him. Setting the age threshold at 50, as the hon. Lady has suggested, would provide the commissioner with too broad a remit, one that would cover more than a third of the population of Wales. There are approximately 600,000 people over the age of 60 in Wales, but if the age were to be dropped to 50, the commissioner’s remit would extend to incorporate more than 1 million people, or an extra 400,000. If we want an effective champion for older people, as I am sure we all do, we must draw a line somewhere. We believe that 60 is a sensible and pragmatic choice. Despite the fact that nobody suggested 60 in certain consultations, we might have drawn the line about right by taking into account all the different proposals.
For those concerned that an age limit of 60 will fail to catch those people experiencing discrimination in employment, as the hon. Member for Carmarthen, East and Dinefwr said, the CEHR’s new age equality regulations, which will come into force this October, will make it unlawful to discriminate in employment on grounds of age and vocational training. It will be the role of the CEHR, which will have appointed a chair and a board by autumn, to enforce that legislation.
The role of the Commissioner for Older People will be different from that of the CEHR. It will be primarily to act for the protection of those who receive or are in need of services as older people in Wales. Of course the commissioner will want to work with the new CEHR on matters affecting older people which are of interest to them both. I envisage that the working relationship will be underpinned at a practical level by a memorandum of understanding or protocol setting out their respective roles. It could also be formalised using the provisions for joint and collaborative working that I referred to during debate on clauses 16 and 17.
Amendment No. 37 seeks to provide the commissioner with the discretion to extend his remit to include persons aged between 50 and 60 who suffer from age-related illness, impairment or disability, or if he considers it appropriate for whatever reason to do so. I understand the hon. Gentleman’s concern that the commissioner’s remit should encompass as far as possible those vulnerable people suffering from dementia or Alzheimer’s disease, for example. The Government and the Assembly considered carefully whether any flexibility in the age threshold could be applied. However, because of the need to specify any exceptions to the normal age threshold in the legislation and because of the difficulties of doing so, the single criterion of 60 was used.
The amendment seeks to specify exceptions to the age threshold of 60, but the criteria are extremely wide. In our view, the amendment would lead to uncertainty and confusion about the commissioner’s powers. The listed exceptions would require the commissioner to decide on a case-by-case basis whether someone fell within the category of persons listed or not. That task would consume a considerable amount of the commissioner’s time and require additional expertise. As for the commissioner’s residual general discretion, it could in effect lower the age threshold to 50. Such a low threshold would bring us back to the issue of the extra 400,000 people who would be eligible to make representations to him.
On balance—we must strike a balance—I believe that 60 is the clearest, most sensible and pragmatic choice. However, that does not mean that persons aged under 60 will not benefit from the appointment of a commissioner. The commissioner will have a significant strategic role, which will include reviewing the functions and arrangements of a number of public bodies and issuing guidance. Any general recommendations or guidance that the commissioner makes to improve services or arrangements will help to drive up standards for all service users, including those under 60.
The hon. Gentleman referred to the strategy for older people in Wales, which would cover people over the age of 50. Its purpose is not just the same as the commissioner’s but encapsulates the active citizenship agenda and preparing people for retirement and older age. The commissioner’s remit is quite different. That is why the strategy took a threshold of age 50. We could carry on this debate and come forward with other ages. I was not particularly happy that the hon. Gentleman suggested 57, that being my next birthday.