| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Ashton of Upholland moved Amendment No. 79:
In section 12 of the European Parliament (Representation) Act 2003—
(a) in subsection (3) after paragraph (b) insert—
"(ba) the regulation of loans or credit facilities which benefit, or any form of security (whether real or personal) which benefits, registered parties in Gibraltar or their members or officers;";
(b) in subsection (4), before the definition of "donation" insert—
""credit facilities" must be construed in accordance with section 71F(11) of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000;"."
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, noble Lords will be aware that prior to the European Parliament elections in 2004, the Government legislated in the European Parliament (Representation) Act 2003 to enable Gibraltar to vote in European Parliament elections. The 2003 Act provided for a new combined region to be created to include Gibraltar. It also provided for consequential amendments to be made in connection with Gibraltar participating in the elections.
The 2003 Act expressly provides for amendments to be made concerning the control of donations. The donations regime for political parties and members' associations was extended to Gibraltar. The Gibraltar equivalents of permissible donors were also permitted to donate to United Kingdom political parties. A limit is placed on the amount of donations and they can be made only during the four months before an election to the European Parliament. At the same time, provision was made to extend the reporting requirements.
It seems only right, therefore, to provide power for the regulated transactions regime to be extended to Gibraltar for the European Parliament elections, as was done for donations. The amendment achieves this by amending the existing power in Section 12 of the European Parliament (Representation) Act 2003. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland moved Amendments Nos. 80 and 81:
Page 122, line 2, column 2, at end insert- "( ) in paragraph 2, sub-paragraph (1)(d), sub-paragraph (3)(a) and, in sub-paragraph (3), the words "the loan or""
Page 122, line 4, column 2, at end insert- "( ) in paragraph 5(4)(a), the words "the loan or", sub-paragraph (i) and the "or" following it"
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill do now pass.
Moved, That the Bill do now pass.—(Baroness Ashton of Upholland.)
On Question, Bill passed, and returned to the Commons with amendments.
7 Jun 2006 : Column 1336
Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [HL]
6.54 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Education and Skills (Lord Adonis) moved Amendment No. 1:
The noble Lord said: My Lords, before I speak to Amendment No. 1, I would like to record the Government's position on carers on behalf of adults who lack capacity, an important issue on which there has been prolonged and helpful discussion between my noble friend Lady Royall and myself and noble Lords on both sides of the House. I thank the carers' organisations and other groups that have assisted us. The discussions have been so productive that we do not face an amendment to Clause 6, which is why I want to take this opportunity to record officially the position that we have now reached. I set it out at length in a letter this morning to my noble friend Lord Harris, copied to other noble Lords, which I believe offers a constructive way forward.
Our shared view is that individuals who arrange care for family and friends should take part in the new vetting and barring scheme, and be given strong official encouragement to do so. However, we do not want potentially to criminalise those vulnerable adults, and their friends and family members, by making them liable to the formal legal duties and penalties in the Bill. We therefore intend to include in a revised code of practice under the Mental Capacity Act an expectation that carers will require those whom they employ on behalf of vulnerable adults in the home to be subject to monitoring. In addition, a booklet specifically targeted at individuals making decisions on behalf of family and friends will set out that recommendation in the same terms. That booklet will be distributed as widely as possible through local authorities, carer agencies and other organisations. I trust that that approach is acceptable to the House and will allay previous concerns on this difficult issue.
Lord Harris of Haringey: My Lords, I welcome my noble friend's statement, which is extremely helpful, and in particular that the Government will set out in the material that they produce a clear expectation on people who organise care under these circumstances. All along, I have sought to create a situation in which carers who are doing their best to look after their loved ones—as all of them will be—are not criminalised or put under unnecessary requirements, but given a piece of paper that enables them to go forward and require people to agree that their names be checked against the register. If the expectation is to be of that nature, what my noble friend announced is extremely welcome.
Lord Adonis: My Lords, we are grateful to my noble friend and other noble Lords for how they have raised the issue, and have great sympathy with the objectives
7 Jun 2006 : Column 1337
that they have sought to achieve. I can give him the assurance that he seeks—that we will set out the expectation in both the code of practice and booklets targeted specifically at individuals making decisions on behalf of family and friends, in the terms that I described earlier.
I shall now speak to Amendments Nos. 1, 12, 14, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 30 and 31, which together repeal the disqualification order regime and provide for it to be succeeded by the new vetting and barring scheme created by the Bill. By removing the courts' ability to make disqualification orders and ensuring that the new scheme provides an equivalent and equally robust replacement, the system for vetting and barring unsuitable adults will be further simplified and more effective at safeguarding children.
Disqualification orders are made only by senior courts, such as the Crown Court, and are available when an offender has been convicted of specified offences against children. The court uses different presumptions depending on the age of the offender and the sentence received. When an adult offender receives a "qualifying sentence", a sentence of 12 months' imprisonment or more, a disqualification order must be made unless the court is satisfied that it is unlikely that the individual will commit any further offence against a child.
7 pm
When a juvenile offender receives a qualifying sentence, a disqualification order must be made if the court is satisfied that it is likely that the individual will commit a further offence against a child. In other cases, where an adult or juvenile does not receive a qualifying sentence, a disqualification order may be made if the court is satisfied that the offender is likely to commit a further offence against a child. The disqualification order bars offenders from working with children and covers the same scope as the bar which applies to those on List 99 and the Protection of Children Act list, which will be replaced by the new scheme.
The offences which trigger consideration of a disqualification order are listed at Schedule 4 to the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000, as amended. These offences will, in almost all cases, be included in the list of specified offences for automatic barring under the provisions of this Bill. This is the means by which we will ensure that the coverage of the scheme is no less than that of the disqualification order regime that it replaces.
The mechanism by which the CRB can identify those who have committed the specified offences, as set out in Amendment No. 24, would be a frequent search of the police national computer for all those with new cautions and convictions for specified offences. The Criminal Records Bureau currently searches the police national computer at least once a day for relevant information, and this would be utilised to ensure that the CRB is aware of new offences within a short space of time following a conviction or a caution.
7 Jun 2006 : Column 1338
The new scheme will not only be able to bar automatically those in respect of whom a disqualification order can currently be made but also bar in cases where a disqualification order cannot currently be imposed; for example, in relation to those who are cautioned for offences and those who are convicted in magistrates' courts. The new provision to bar following conviction or caution for certain offences applies also to the vulnerable adults list.
I need hardly say that running a judicial-based barring scheme alongside an administrative barring scheme involves considerable duplication which is not in the public interest and we are seeking to eliminate that duplication. We also intend to make transitional arrangements to cover those who are already subject to disqualification orders. Any amendments required to do that will be introduced in the other place. I beg to move.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |