HL Deb 27 February 1992 vol 536 cc378-9

3.11 p.m.

Lord Murray of Epping Forest asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether, in the light of the success of the Independent Living Fund, and of the fears expressed by disabled people at the likely consequences of local authorities becoming responsible for new clients in 1993, they will review their decision to hand over this service to local authorities.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Social Security (Lord Henley)

My Lords, the Independent Living Fund is not the only source of help for disabled people. Local authorities and health authorities already have significant responsibilities in this area and these will be further enhanced by the arrangements for "care in the community" from April 1993 when, for example, significant resources will be transferred from the Department of Social Security to local authorities.

A successor body to the ILF will be appointed to take over the existing case load in April 1993 and will have power to respond to the needs of those whose care costs rise. Details have yet to be finalised.

Lord Murray of Epping Forest

My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. Is he aware that disabled people's organisations appreciate that old cases are to be left with the Independent Living Fund? Eleven thousand people will benefit enormously from its administration. Does the noble Lord share their view that the success of the Independent Living Fund in keeping those people in their own homes at low cost cannot be matched by local authorities, as has been shown by studies? Will he reconsider the decision to transfer new cases to local authorities, which cannot do as good a job?

Lord Henley

My Lords, I am grateful for the praise that the noble Lord heaps on the ILF. We have always been full of praise for it and believe that it has done a good job. However, we have always made it clear that the ILF was to be an interim measure to ensure that severely disabled people could continue to live independently in the community until the permanent community care arrangements could be put in place. Thereafter it must be a matter for the local authorities to develop such packages for severely disabled people. The continued existence of an ILF for new cases would possibly create a perverse incentive on local authorities to offload many of their worst cases onto the ILF.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham

My Lords, does the Minister accept that, if he were to announce that the ILF had a firm five-year future from 1992, including the ability to take on new cases, and that there would be an open-minded review of its longer term future in year three—by which time community care would be firmly established—he would have all-party support and, I believe, the support of local authorities? In the light of that, will the Minister reconsider his reply to my noble friend?

Lord Henley

My Lords, the noble Baroness makes an interesting suggestion. It is certainly welcome to have support from the noble Baroness for a change. However, I repeat what I said. We do not see a case for continuing the ILF for new cases after April 1993 for the reasons that I gave.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham

My Lords, does the noble Lord accept that community care will be launched only in April 1993 and that in the same year to introduce the movement of new cases from the ILF, with all its experience, to local authorities undertaking community care for the first time is surely undesirable and may put such cases at risk of inadequate help?

Lord Henley

My Lords, no. I believe that the noble Baroness is completely wrong. It would create the wrong start to new community care arrangements if there were a successor body to the ILF that could take on the new cases.

Lord Murray of Epping Forest

My Lords, does the Minister accept that the very novelty of its innovation by the Government—which is welcomed—demonstrates its superiority over local authority provision? Studies that have been made by local authorities to date suggest that they cannot match the quality of service and that the likely result of transfer to local authorities is to leave more disabled people in residential care, which we all wish to avoid.

Lord Henley

My Lords, as I explained to the noble Baroness, it is the very novelty of the arrangements that make it undesirable for a successor body to the ILF to take on new cases.