I wish to speak about the charging and assessment procedures for the admission of old people to statutory residential homes in Northern Ireland. I have three points to make. However, first I should like to thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to change the subject of tonight's Adjournment Debate. Originally another subject was submitted.

I acknowledge the tremendous work done in statutory residential homes by the staff. I do not wish to detract from their commitment to duty. On behalf of my constituents who are concerned about the assessment and charging procedures, I wish to state how much they appreciate the work of the staff.

I shall describe the history of the problem. In the past eight or nine months a number of constituents have approached me about the high charges levied in respect of their parents and loved ones who have been admitted to the homes. The charges vary from a small amount to the exceedingly high sum of £95 a week. The charges average about £75 a week.

My constituents are also worried about the lack of information available to the old person who is admitted. The Minister has said in correspondence that care is taken to acquaint old people with the charges. However, some constituents are willing to confirm—and I believe them—that old people have been taken into homes without the level of charging being made clear to them or to their relatives.

Old people are faced with charges which can be as high as £95 a week. They cannot afford to meet such charges unless they sell their home. A person's sole home is disregarded for the purposes of assessing supplementary benefit. That is not the case with admission to statutory homes. Therefore, there is an area of unfairness and a need to ensure that old people who have to be taken into full-time care are not treated in a less generous tay than whose who apply for supplementary benefit and continue to live in their own homes.

In many cases the children of old people have sustained them by direct contribution, not only financially but by bringing them into their own homes from time to time. They have enabled the elderly to maintain their investment—that is, their own small residential homes. When the old person hopes to return that generosity and care by leaving the home to the loved ones, if he is taken into a statutory residential home and cannot meet the charges—which range up to £95 a week—the area boards deprive him of his ability to do so.

The Minister said in his letter that no one in statutory old people's homes had been taken to court to enforce payment of such a debt. I do not disagree with that. However, although the area boards have not enforced the sale through the courts, they have occasioned the sale of some of those homes. I can cite two examples of that from the voluminous correspondence I have received.

Some people in statutory homes pay a relatively small amount. Another person, who has perhaps been careful with a small amount of money and acquired a dwelling worth about £7,000 to £9,000—which is not a great deal of money—is forced to sell that home to meet a higher charge because the value of the home has been included for assessment purposes. That is manifestly unfair.

While pursuing the matter during the past eight or nine months I have corresponded not only with the Northern Ireland Office but with the relevant Department. The Minister in a letter dated 5 October gave a small glimmer of hope when he said: A joint central and local government working group on personal social services charging policies, which reported in 1980, considered fully the treatment of the family home in the assessment of charges. Amongst other things, they suggested that some of the difficulties might be overcome by increasing the capital disregard"— which is a good idea— and by disregarding the capital value of the former home and assessing only any income it produces. I believe that that is an excellent idea. The letter continues: These options are still under consideration and decisions on them will be reflected in new regulations on charges for local authority residential accommodation which are being prepared. The Minister came to this slightly disappointing conclusion: Generally, however, it is unlikely that we should wish to depart from the discretionary elements of charging arrangements lo the extent of debarring authorities from taking into account the value of property when they consider the circumstances appropriate. Some discretionary powers are at the disposal of local authorities and they are clearly outlined in the memorandum of guidance. However, none of the paragraphs in the memorandum of guidance meets the problem with which I am trying to grapple. The law on assessment charging should be brought into line with the supplementary benefit legislation, which precludes any consideration of a sole residential home.

I have a number of questions to ask the Minister. When he has time, perhaps he will reply in writing. How many elderly persons' sole homes are being included for assessment in the Province? I believe that there are enough to warrant concern but not enough to inhibit the Government, on grounds of expenditure, from taking action. How many elderly persons have been informed that their properties must be sold to meet past costs incurred during their stay throughout the years? That figure would help us to convince the Government that changes are needed.

What time factor would render the board's claims on properties invalid because an elderly person had already signed over the house to a loved one or left it to that person in a will? I have read the document carefully and paragraph 26 appears to deal with that question but imprecisely. It says that, if one deprives oneself deliberately of an asset, one will be assessed as if the asset were still available. I do not believe that the boards would wish to be as crass and cruel as that. There must be a cutoff point before which, if a house was assigned, willed or put in trust, there would be no claim on that property. Does such an attitude prevail or such a facility exist?

Will the Minister comment on the Government's attitude to the 1980 report referred to in the letter of 5 October? I hope that we are not too late in having the debate. I hope that the Government are still open to suggestions. While it would be helpful to raise the disregard level, justice would be done to elderly people entering homes only if the sole residential property were disregarded. The only exception should be where income is earned from the letting of that property. I accept that that should be taken into account but not the value of the property.

I should be grateful if the Minister would say whether there is still time for him to add his weight to the argument and discussion about this important issue that may still be taking place in Cabinet.