Mental Capacity (Amendment) Bill — Schedule 1 — Consultation on Deprivation of Liberty — Mentally Incapacitated People — 12 Feb 2019 at 17:45

The majority of MPs voted to allow consultations on the subject of a mentally incapacitated person's deprivation of liberty to be carried out by a care home manager rather than a hospital manager, local authority, clinical commissioning group or local health board.

MPs were considering the Mental Capacity (Amendment) Bill[1].

The amendment rejected in this vote was:

  • Amendment 49, page 16, line 12, leave out from “out” to the end of line 16, and insert “by the responsible body.”

Had it not been rejected the amendment would have impacted Schedule 1 of the Bill which contained a proposed new schedule for the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The element in question was within a section titled: Consultation and stated:

  • Consultation under this paragraph must be carried out—
  • (a) if the arrangements are care home arrangements and authorisation is being determined under paragraph 16, by the care home manager;
  • (b) otherwise, by the responsible body.

Those to be consulted were: the cared-for person; anyone named by the cared-for person as someone to be consulted about arrangements of the kind in question; anyone engaged in caring for the cared-for person or interested in the cared-for person’s welfare; any donee of a lasting power of attorney or an enduring power of attorney granted by the cared-for person; any deputy appointed for the cared-for person by the court; and any appropriate person and any independent mental capacity advocate concerned.

Paragraphs 10 and 11 defined a responsible body as being a hospital manager, a local authority, a clinical commissioning group (in England) or a local health board (in Wales).

The rejected amendment was accompanied by the following explanatory statement:

Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit free service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your electricity and/or gas to Bulb Energy who provide 100% renewable electricity and tend to be 20% cheaper than the 'Big Six'. They'll also pay any exit fees (up to £120) from your old supplier AND give you (and us) a £50 credit for joining up via our Bulb Referral Link.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Con294 (+2 tell) 0093.4%
DUP10 00100.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 4050.0%
Lab0 233 (+2 tell)091.8%
LDem0 10090.9%
PC0 40100.0%
Total:304 252092.3%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
no rebellions

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive