I warmly welcome Clause 134 as a whole, as it extends direct payments to include people who lack capacity. We strongly agree with the choice and flexibility that it will give the system. It is an important and possibly overlooked part of the Bill.  The Minister will also be aware that the provision has been welcomed by many of the relevant organisations, including Age Concern, Carers UK, the Parkinson’s Disease Society, the Local Government Association and the Commission for Social Care Inspection. However, some organisations have expressed the concern that although it is excellent in principle, and that it is right in practice, they want to be reassured that adequate support is offered for the service user and the carer—and the nominated representative or agent.

The amendments are about creating safeguards to ensure that there is sufficient protection for recipients of direct payments. Together, they would mean that a designated person must be determined by investigations to be undertaken by the responsible local authority. They would bring in arrangements that would allow direct payments to be made to the agents of someone lacking capacity, interlined with current good practice as established under the Mental Health Act 2007, in order to determine who is or is not suitable to act as agent.

The amendments would place a clear duty on local authorities to make such checks when agreeing to make payments to an agent or nominated person. The suggestion is simply that such checks would be prudent to ensure the safety of vulnerable people who lack capacity. The amendments would also ensure that public funds were appropriately spent and not passed on to anyone with an unsuitable financial background, which would make such payments a matter of concern. It might be that the Minister can assure the Committee that the amendments are not necessary, but I am sure that he agrees that the sentiment is a sensible one. I look forward to his comments.