Mrs.
Gillan: I am grateful to the Minister for being so
generous in giving way. As he is laying out the sort of information
that will be available, could he let every member of the Committee have
a detailed letter specifically on the meetings that he held with his
colleague that sets out exactly what those discussions and proposals
were in time for next Wednesday’s sitting? I am sure that that
would be a great help and assist our
understanding.
Phil
Hope: Yes, I hope to provide the Committee with the
relevant information as and when we reach those points in the Bill.
Officials from the Department have been in regular contact with the
promoter of the Bill—the hon. Member for Chesham and
Amersham—and her advisers to discuss how best we can take
forward their concerns in ways that give the degree of certainty that
action will happen in responding to the needs of children, young adults
and adults across the country, while retaining the flexibility that we
need to ensure that local needs and circumstances are taken fully into
account. I hope that we can have meaningful discussions to achieve a
mutually satisfactory
outcome. My
starting point for the sittings will be to try to convince the
Committee, as I said on Second Reading, that there is no need for the
legislation that we are going to consider. Like the hon. Lady, I am in
an unusual position on a private Member’s Bill. It is unique for
me and I dare say for many other Members, because this is not a
Government Bill. It is not a Bill that we feel able to support in its
current
form. On
a point that was raised about the money resolution, we expected that
the promoter of the Bill would undertake the assessment of costs
associated with her proposals that we need to inform decisions on the
scope of the money resolution. However, we have not had that
information, although I wrote to the hon. Lady and my officials met her
team only last week. Inevitably, that has meant a delay in tabling the
money resolution. I hope that we can resolve those
issues.
Mrs.
Gillan: Indication was given to my team of advisers, who
met the ministerial team of advisers last Tuesday, that a money
resolution would be tabled in time for today’s sitting. I cannot
table that, as the Minister knows. Also, when it comes to an
assessment, I am but an hon. Member promoting a private Member’s
Bill that was suggested by outside charitable organisations. I do not
have the resources available to him or to his ministerial colleague
nor, individually, the expertise or skill to provide the Minister with
those assessments. However, the Minister does, and if the Bill is
delivering everything that he says of it, he must per se have already
carried out those calculations. I hope that now he is well aware that I
do not have the resources to provide the financial information that he
is asking for—something he could so easily do, if he wished to
encourage the Bill
forward. Finally—I
apologise for the length of my intervention—I am sad to hear
that the Minister is still seeking to persuade us that the Bill is not
necessary. When the Bill came to me, it had already been the subject of
discussions between officials in his Department and outside
organisations. Therefore, it is rather sad that an indication might have
been given to an outside organisation that such a private
Member’s Bill would receive a good hearing in the House. I hope
that that was not the case, because that would be a sad way for a
Department to conduct
itself. Phil
Hope: On the hon. Lady’s point about the money
resolution, that is why I said that we are in this rather unique
situation—this is not a Government Bill—hence the issues
about money resolutions and so on. We shall do what is needed to get to
the debate on the clauses that have financial implications. We have
tabled the money resolution, but there are the procedures of the House
to get through. None the less, because the Bill may have financial
implications and as yet the hon. Lady does not—is unable to, as
she rightly said—have the resources to spell them out, the
Government would have difficulty in agreeing to clauses for which we do
not know the cost. When we get to individual clauses, we shall have to
explore the issues and what it all might mean. I tried to signal
earlier that we have been in regular contact with the hon. Lady and
have asked questions. I hope that we can work collaboratively to find
our way through the difficult issues, because that would be in
everyone’s
interest. I
repeat what we said about the Bill on Second Reading. We know that
legislation can be a blunt and crude instrument for driving change,
especially when the end that we seek is better awareness and better use
of the expertise and resources already in the system. We must preserve
for councils the freedom and flexibility necessary to meet the complex
web of local needs, giving them the scope and skills that they need to
zero in on the specific needs of people with autism. Hence, for which I
make no apology, I expect to return again and again in our sittings to
the fact that rigid legislation ties the hands of those making such
efforts and will do more harm than
good. I
hope that we can all recognise that the Government’s work on
autism—whether with children, young people in transition to
adulthood or adults—is significant, far-reaching and the first
to have ever occurred. We shall discuss whether the clauses are flawed,
unnecessary or have financial costs, and if there is a way forward and
the disadvantages can be resolved, I hope that we can find mutually
satisfactory solutions. However, that is not the case with the Bill, as
I said on Second Reading and repeat now, so that the Committee is fully
aware of the
issues.
The
Chairman: Order. Yes, the Minister did and he has. We are
in some danger of having another Second Reading debate, which I am not
prepared to
permit.
Angela
Browning: When the Minister wrote to all Members just
before Second Reading, he outlined in some detail, on a point-by-point
basis, the Government’s alternative strategy, indicating how
they felt that they were meeting the Bill’s general
requirements. In response to my hon. Friend the Member for Chesham and
Amersham, will the Minister assist the Committee by making available
the costings associated with that letter and the point-by-point list of
the proposals that the Government have introduced? He has appreciated
what my hon. Friend said about producing the exact costs for
the Bill, and his making those Government costings available would be a
good starting point for discussion in
Committee.
Phil
Hope: My dilemma is that this is not my Bill, and it has
costings attached to it that its movers have not been able to provide.
We have tabled the money resolution, and it will be passed, so that we
can move into clause-by-clause examination. We need information about
the Bill’s costings, not about my proposals and what the
Government are doing—that will come up as we debate the clauses.
The issue is what the clauses might cost the taxpayer and to what
extent they are the right way forward in delivering better outcomes for
young people, children and adults with autism. It is the Bill that we
are debating, and it might have financial implications. Although this
is an opportunity to interrogate the Government—I think that
hon. Members said as much on Second Reading—and I would happily
find time to respond to questions from Members, we are
actually debating a Bill.
The
Chairman: Order. Actually, we are not; we are debating an
Adjournment motion, and I would like to come back to
that.
Mrs.
Gillan: Will the Minister give
way?
Phil
Hope: I was about to give way to the hon. Member for
Tiverton and
Honiton.
Angela
Browning: I appreciate what the Minister says about the
Bill’s costings—I take that point—but if I were to
table parliamentary questions based on the list in his letter, asking
what the costings were for each item, I would assume that his
Department would most certainly answer. That is not an unreasonable
request. In the spirit of co-operation, it would help if he made
available those costings to the Committee. In his letter, his argument
was basically that we do not need this or that in the Bill because the
Government are already going to provide an adequate service through an
alternative route. If we at least have those costings, that might help
us to develop any potential additional costings incurred via my hon.
Friend’s route—the Bill—rather than via the route
proposed in the Minister’s
letter.
Phil
Hope: I am trying to keep in order, Mr. Gale.
You are giving us a great deal of latitude. When we arrive at
discussions about the clauses that relate to the announcements that the
Government have made, I will happily discuss those issues. However, it
is the clauses that will be before us, and we will need to consider the
extent to which the Bill has costs and whether those costs are
reasonable when we get to that debate. The money resolution would
enable us to do that. I have explained the cause of the delay: we would
be tabling and supporting a money resolution without knowing what
moneys were involved, as the Bill’s movers failed to provide
information to the Government on the Bill’s costs. I hope that
we can discuss all that when we get to those clauses. Although I will
take interventions, Mr. Gale, I am trying to keep within the
strictures that you have laid upon
me.
Mrs.
Gillan: I am grateful to the Minister for giving
way. Perhaps we do need to adjourn until next week, because I tabled a
question to the Minister simply about
the costs of local authorities identifying the numbers of disabled
children and adults with autism in their areas. The response was that
no costing had been made, and that costing is being worked on for a
prevalence study that was promised last year, so 12 months later the
costings are still being worked on for promises made last year. I
support my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Honiton—we
are all friends here, it is an all-party Committee, I hope—in
saying that if the Minister’s proposals fulfil the Bill’s
aim, it would help to have the Department’s full costings. I was
surprised by the answer that I got on my birthday, on 21 April, that no
costings had been carried
out.
Phil
Hope: My birthday was two days before the hon.
Lady’s, which makes us the same star sign. I am not sure whether
that is a good or bad thing.
Mrs.
Gillan: No, you are an Aries, and I am a Taurus.
The
Chairman: I am neither.
Angela
Browning: You are obviously both on
the cusp.
Phil
Hope: It would appear that I am on the right side of the
cusp, but let us not go there, Mr. Gale.
It is for the
movers of the Bill, not the Government, to provide the costings.
Perhaps we will discuss that later when we get into the
clauses.
Angela
Browning: Will the Minister give
way?
Phil
Hope: I think that I should make some progress or I shall
get into difficulty with you, Mr. Gale.
Today, we
have started an important conversation across the country on how to
transform services and support for people with autism. I am sure that
we will use the Committee to discuss the proposals in detail. I want to
use these sittings to set out how the strategy will have real bite, be
comprehensive and far-reaching and have a deep impact, as I try to
persuade the Committee that ours is the right approach, as distinct
from that in the
Bill. I
will describe in more detail the five themes that we set out in the
consultation: health, guaranteeing the highest standards of specialist
and mainstream care for autistic patients across all settings; social
exclusion, removing the everyday barriers that autistic people face;
giving people with autism more choice and control over how and when
they interact with services; better awareness-raising and training,
ensuring that we have a highly skilled and knowledgeable work force;
and, most importantly, supporting people with autism to take advantage
of training and employment opportunities. As I learnt today, only 15
per cent. of adults with autism are in employment, yet we know how
important a job is to people with any form of mental health issue or
disability and to those on the autistic spectrum. I want to explain how
the adult autism strategy and the measures covering children and young
people will fully meet the Bill’s stated aims.
I want to
address the question that the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham
raised about the prevalence study and the importance of better data. A
great deal of work is already going on for both adults and children,
but I know from the way that the hon. Lady raised the issue and from
the debate on Second Reading that there was concern about the adult
prevalence study. I will welcome the opportunity to reassure the
Committee during its sittings that we are absolutely committed to
delivering that study. Getting this right is crucial for local
authorities and primary care trusts to have a robust picture of the
number of people with autism in their areas to commission the right
services to meet people’s needs. We have commissioned the NHS
information centre to manage the study and are about to appoint a
scientific adviser to write the research specification and ensure that
we get the best study that we
can. I
hope that I have demonstrated that we will have our work cut out in
carrying out detailed scrutiny of the Bill. I am looking forward to
devoting my Wednesday afternoons for the next few weeks to reassuring
the Committee that the actions that the Government already have in hand
will achieve everything that the Bill seeks to do and will do so more
quickly and effectively. Moreover, by preserving freedom and
flexibility at local level, they will give us a strong base to make
further improvements for the care and support of people with autism in
the future. I support the Adjournment motion moved by the hon.
Lady. 3.3
pm
Annette
Brooke: On behalf of my colleague, the hon. Member for
Romsey, who unfortunately cannot be here today, I would like to say
that we both look forward to serving under your chairmanship,
Mr. Gale. We are particularly interested in getting into
detailed debate next week, because the issue is of such importance that
members of the public will not want to see any game playing. I hope
that we are doing the best for all our constituents; many parents of
all ages are deeply concerned and are sometimes in dire circumstances
because of the lack of support. I look forward to the detailed
debate. 3.4
pm Mr.
Richard Bacon (South Norfolk) (Con): I am pleased to speak
briefly on the Adjournment motion. I should like to address the money
resolution as I understand that we are adjourning because it is not in
place.
I listened
carefully to the Minister, who has had several opportunities to answer
the question as to what the costs of the Government’s proposals
are likely to be. His reply on several occasions has been that this is
a private Member’s Bill and it is for the private Member, my
hon. Friend the Member for Chesham and Amersham, to provide those
details and that she has not done so. Of course, it must be true that
it is for my hon. Friend to provide costings for her Bill, but it is
also the case that the Government’s attitude to the
Bill—the Government have made it clear that they do not think
the Bill should go ahead—is intimately related to their own
proposals, and their own proposals must have a cost.
The Minister
said a minute ago that he thought his proposals were more effective and
that they would be quicker. I think of the National Audit
Office’s mantra of economy, effectiveness and efficiency. The
Minister
must also have a view on whether his proposals are more economic. If he
has such a view it can only be because he has some numbers. All my hon.
Friends were asking him to do was to share those numbers with the
Committee. For him to say in response that it is for my hon. Friend the
Member for Chesham and Amersham to come up with numbers for the
proposals in her Bill is not an answer to the points that my hon.
Friends were making. It is an answer to a different
point. | 
