I will follow up on what Deputy Lawless said about people coming into assets after a period of time. I do not think it is going to be overnight, as such. There have been studies, some of which are actually quite offensive, in which homeless people have been given money. I have seen this in the United States. One guy got in the region of $500,000 and it was gone within six months. There are, therefore, issues. If people are not used to handling money or other assets, there has to be some sort of process tied into that. I do not think it will happen overnight, but it is something of which to be cognisant. I listened to the Minister of State's contribution last night; I was in the Chamber for most of it anyway. I support most of the elements within the Bill and the whole intention behind it because it deals with a real and immediate risk that people who are wards of court could be left in a legal vacuum because the system has not been able to complete all the capacity reviews in time. Of course, no one wants that to happen, and the legislation will hopefully give the courts the flexibility they need to prevent it. When we are in opposition, as others will say as well, we have to ask why we are here. The deadline in the 2015 Act did not just suddenly appear. As a State, successive Governments have had years to prepare for the transition away from wardship. The Decision Support Service was trying to do its best in these circumstances but, in my view, was not given the levels of staffing or funding required to meet the challenges. The courts could have been asked to absorb this kind of surge of complex reviews in many cases without getting the additional resources they needed. I do not know that for a fact. I am not totally familiar, but it has been suggested that the courts were not getting the resources to deal with it over a period of time. Maybe the Minister of State would come back on that. The main criticisms have been that the system was under-resourced from the word go, so if we are moving forward with a new model, there is a question of whether it will get that resourcing. If the legislation is to work as intended, the extension mechanism will need to be managed, for example. It cannot be a rolling deferral. People have been waiting for a long time to exit the system, which we have all acknowledged is outdated. If extensions are granted, there should be very strict time limits. I do not know if anyone here in the Chamber has spoken about an ongoing consistent review but the committee has discussed the question of set periods of time. Second is a question which relates to training in the past or, more important, going forward. Will professionals in healthcare, social care and in the legal field apply the functional capacity tests in a uniform way? Will the resources be put into training to make sure that, in all sectors, these decisions will be made in a measurable way? Obviously discretion is needed in certain instances but it should not be left to an uneven process, on the basis of either region or sex. If we do want this very welcome rights-based system, we have to invest in it. I am sure the Minister of State will say the resources will be applied over the coming years, but often those promises have not been followed up sufficiently quickly. It is something to take on board because we do not want to replace one flawed system with another that looks better on paper but leaves vulnerable people without adequate protection. My key point is resourcing. The Decision Support Service needs sustained investment. The courts need additional capacity. People in the system need accessible information and consistent support to ensure their views, preferences and free will are entirely taken on board so that things are not just put into the legislation but exist in the real practical application of things. I welcome the Bill. It is better than leaving people in legal uncertainty, but unless it is met with resources, it will be just a stopgap. I wish the Minister of State well in bringing this legislation forward. It is not a field in which I consider myself an expert or in which I am particularly knowledgeable, but others on the committee know more and I hope they will put forward amendments, which the Minister of State will look at in due course. to make the Bill as strong as possible and I hope that she provides the resources.

Sentiment score: 0.19