---

Health and Social Care Bill

I very much welcome the amendment. The Government are to be congratulated on bringing it forward. With this amendment, they will fulfil their original intention, which was thwarted by the YL case in the House of Lords. That is very much to be welcomed. It was not only their original intention; when that intention failed, the Government promised to bring forward an amendment during the course of the Committee, which is what they have done. I note that self-funders—people who pay for their own care—are not covered by the amendment. This is still an important issue, but the organisations that have been lobbying for this scope—the RNID and the RNIB, of which I am the chairman—are no longer calling for this in the Bill, and nor is the group including Age Concern, the British Institute of Human Rights, Liberty, Justice and Help the Aged. However, it remains an important issue and they and I hope that it will be possible to return to it in the future. The Commission for Equality and Human Rights is anxious to be reassured that guidance will be published in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland so that people can understand their rights. The Age Concern, British Institute of Human Rights, Liberty, Justice and Help the Aged group would also be grateful if assurances could be given on the record that the following scenarios are covered: first, care home residents whose care is wholly funded by the NHS under the NHS continuing healthcare arrangements; secondly, care home residents who receive an NHS-funded nursing care contribution of £1,011 a week for care provided by a registered nurse; and, finally, people who are self-funding residents lacking mental capacity living in an institutional setting who are effectively detained by the institution—that is, the Bournewood-type cases. It might seem inconsistent to ask for reassurance on that point having recognised that the case of self-funders is not to be covered in the Bill, but the point is that residents lacking mental capacity who are living in an institutional setting are effectively in a different category and are not in a position to make decisions for themselves. As I say, they are effectively detained by the institution. I invite the Minister to consider whether they should not be regarded as in a separate category from self-funders generally and whether they should be covered within the scope of this legislation.