I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) (Amendment) Bill 2026. I thank the Minister of State and her officials for their efforts to update this largely technical but important legislation which impacts many of the most vulnerable in our society. This is a targeted, necessary measure to provide legal certainty for people who remain in wardship arrangements as we approach the statutory deadline of 26 April 2026. The Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act 2015, commenced on 26 April 2023, rightly set a three-year timeframe for the court to review and transition every adult ward of court to the new rights-based framework. However, the reality is that the system has not been able to complete that work in time. I understand that of around 1,800 wardship matters, only 286 have resulted in discharge orders, with about 1,537 still pending. In those circumstances, doing nothing would risk leaving people in an unacceptable legal limbo, with knock-on uncertainty for families and clinicians alike. What this Bill does is straightforward. It gives the High Court discretion, on a case-by-case basis, to extend the time for making a capacity declaration in circumstances where the deadline is imminent, there is good reason, and where an extension is in the interests of justice. A further extension is available only in exceptional circumstances and there is an outer limit of 18 months, bringing us to 25 October 2027 at the latest. It also addresses a practical problem for young people in wardship who turn 18 after 26 October 2025, where practitioners have said they need more time to assemble the necessary evidence for the court. Again, the approach is discretionary, proportionate and capped at 18 months. The original reform was, and remains, profoundly important. The 2015 Act replaced a paternalistic wardship model with a more modern framework, and while an extension must never become an excuse for drift, this Bill has taken on feedback from practitioners and strikes a practical balance while also preventing a cliff edge as we approach the April deadline. We should also be cognisant of the views of stakeholders. For example, the Law Society has raised serious concerns about the operation of the Decision Support Service, including long processing delays for arrangements like enduring power of attorney and difficulties with the digital portal. Advocacy organisations have also been highlighting practical barriers and the lived experience of navigating the new framework. Those warnings matter because there is a real-world risk here. If the pathway out of wardship is slow, complex or intimidating, then people can end up stuck between two systems, reformed on paper but not in practice. So, alongside passing this Bill, we need a very clear operational commitment from the Minister and the relevant bodies. Clearly resources matter. The courts, the wardship office, medical assessors, legal aid and the decision-support infrastructure must be scaled so that applications are processed quickly and predictably. Otherwise, we are simply moving the bottleneck from April 2026 to October 2027. Processes need to be accessible and understandable where possible. That means plain-language guidance, assisted pathways for people who are not digitally confident, and proactive supports for families and representatives. The goal is empowerment, not more paperwork. I would also like to see enhanced transparency in reporting. We should be able to track progress month by month, possibly through a digital dashboard, of how many reviews listed, how many declarations made, how many discharges completed and the average timeframes so that this House can ensure the extension is being used as intended, and not only as proposed. I support this Bill because legal certainty and continuity of the protection of vulnerable people is not optional. However, I also say clearly that the reform promise of the 2015 Act must be delivered in full, with urgency and with the person at the centre of every decision. If we get the resources and the user experience right, this Bill will do what it should: prevent legal uncertainty now, while keeping the system moving decisively toward dignity, autonomy and rights in practice.

Sentiment score: 0.15