---

Disabled Persons (Independent Living) Bill [HL]

My Lords, this has been a splendid debate, which I have enjoyed enormously. I thank all noble Lords who took part, whatever their viewpoint—although with one or two speakers I would have liked a bit more give and less circumlocution. It is all very puzzling. My noble friend was right to point out what the Government have done. They have a good record, yet it is by no means good enough to satisfy the speakers in this debate. We have worked on this Bill for a long time. It is a marvellous Bill which is very necessary. Yet people say things such as ““later on”” and ““we have not got the cash””. Both parties, I think, would say that. That is fine, but if the Government want to save cash, why not save it from other budgets? Why always choose disabled people? To talk about 2025 is preposterous. Life chances is an outstanding report, but to refer to 2025 is ridiculous. We want specific commitments to working quickly. As I am not a Minister I can ask for this commitment. I know that Ministers have problems to face but I emphasise that the provisions in the Bill are fairly reasonable given the suffering of millions of people. Without these provisions, disabled people will have to go on for many more years in their present situation. The whole edifice of social care is rocky; there is so much wrong with it now. The Bill will connect all of those things. We do not want instant implementation but, equally, we do not want it to drag out, because, if it does, we will get nowhere. The noble Baroness, Lady Gardner of Parkes, rightly spoke about earned income being disregarded. As to the technical points, I have had no letter from the Clerk. This afternoon I received a message from an official in the Public Bill Office asking me to go and see her. I found my way to the Public Bill Office, which is hidden away in the bowels of the Earth somewhere, and she pointed out all the technical points and asked whether I could deal with them. This was about 10 minutes before I was due to speak. I am not blaming her—she was very kind and helpful—but I told her that I could not master all of those points. It is like mathematics; I glaze over when I see figures like that. She said that we could deal with it at a later stage, and I agreed with that. So, if there is a Committee stage, we can deal with the points mentioned by the noble Baroness. The lady in the Public Bill Office agreed that that is the best approach, and I am sure we can handle it. I am very glad that the noble Baroness has raised these very important points. If we do not get them right, the whole Bill will crumble. My noble friend Lady Darcy de Knayth is right: if we are not careful we will just be helping the worst-off, as we do now, and not those with moderate disabilities, who suffer almost as much as the severely disabled. We should strongly press the point that all disabled people, regardless of the degree of disability, should be compensated through this legislation. I agree with my noble friend that we are discovering many more disabled people of all kinds, of all races and colour, old and young. The Bill will specifically help young people but I do not have time to go into detail. I am sure my noble friend is right. My noble friend Lady Wilkins referred to the noble Lord, Lord Carter. I am deeply moved by his illness. His wife accompanies him at home and here; they are a wonderful couple. I do not know how ill he is but I hope he makes a full recovery. He is a very tough guy. As Chief Whip he did not wield a stick, but he was persuasive. I send him my warmest regards through my noble friend Lady Wilkins. The Government have not done a cost-benefit analysis. We should have sorted that out much earlier but, one way or another, we must find out what the situation is. I am convinced that the Government do not recognise how much money could be saved through the Bill. They will save an enormous amount, and the costs are minimal. The Minister may be right in saying that it could be a heavy commitment, but heavy commitments do not necessarily mean heavy outgoings, especially if the other side of the equation—the savings—is taken into account. There are savings to be made through many thousands of people getting jobs, paying taxes, not going into hospital and so on. I fully agree with everything that the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, said. I do not think the hour is too late, but there it is. I ask the House to give my Bill a Second Reading. On Question, Bill read a second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.