| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Menzies Campbell (Fife, North-East): In accordance with the spirit of the House, I associate myself entirely with the remarks of the right hon. Member for Worthing (Sir T. Higgins). His analysis of the consequences of voting is clear beyond question and the House would be well advised to follow his advice. I shall certainly advise my right hon. and hon. Friends to do so.
Mr. Boateng: I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.
Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.
Mr. Peter Brooke (City of London and Westminster, South):
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
With this, it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments: No. 41, in clause 18, page 13, line 13, at end insert--
No. 42, in clause 19, page 14, line 3, leave out '5 and 6' and insert
Mr. Brooke:
It is a remarkable coincidence that I should rise to move new clause 11 when, in rather less than a minute's time, my speech will be interrupted and I shall sit down, only to be called immediately to move the Second Reading of the King's College London Bill [Lords]. I therefore must occupy this brief period with
It being Seven o'clock, and there being private business set down by direction of The Chairman of Ways and Means under Standing Order No. 16 (Time for taking private business), further proceedings stood postponed.
Order for Second Reading read.
Mr. Peter Brooke (City of London and Westminster, South):
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time. [Interruption.]
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris):
Order.I ask hon. Members to withdraw from the Chamber unless they are taking part in the debate. Further to that, I ask hon. Members who are having a dialogue on the previous Bill to do so outside the Chamber.
Mr. Brooke:
The Bill is promoted jointly by King's college London and the united medical and dental schools of Guy's and St. Thomas's hospitals. For brevity, I shall refer to the latter as UMDS. Both are part of the university of London. I should declare an interest. I am a fellow of King's college and a member of the council of the university of London. The main campus of King's college lies at the heart of my constituency.
The Bill is designed to bring about the merger of King's college and UMDS. However, the scene is a little more complex than that. King's college already has a medical and dental school: King's college school of medicine and dentistry. Following the merger, King's college--a multi-faculty institution--will have an integrated medical and dental school made up of the present UMDS and King's college school of medicine and dentistry. I shall return to that, because the coming together of the two medical and dental schools is key to the success of the merger.
The Bill's provisions are straightforward. In large measure, they follow those of other private Acts, merging medical schools with multi-faculty colleges. The Bill has a lengthy preamble that recites the history of the formation of King's college London and UMDS. King's was founded by charter in 1829. The histories ofSt. Thomas's and Guy's can be traced as far back as 1550 and 1769 respectively. The Bill is self-explanatory, but, as there is only a small number of key clauses, I shall at this juncture rehearse their rationale and relevance to the purpose of the Bill that I have just described.
Clause 3 provides that King's college school of medicine and dentistry and UMDS may agree a day to be the effective date for the proposed merger. Clause 4 provides for the dissolution of UMDS, and subsequent clauses provide for the transfer to King's of UMDS's property, obligations and rights. Clauses 6 and 7, together with schedule 2, protect certain properties of UMDS for 10 years. During that period, the use of those properties may not be changed without the approval of a body that the Bill establishes, which is the continuing trustees of UMDS. Clauses 15 and 16 amend the statutes of King's college so that UMDS will be appropriately represented on the principal decision-making bodies of King's.
I urge that the Bill be accepted for three main reasons. First, it is widely agreed that the integration of medical schools and multi-faculty colleges such as King's leads to improved quality in both medical education and research. Secondly, it is only by unifying two medical and dental schools of international distinction--UMDS and King's
college school of medicine and dentistry--that further potential for achievement in medical and dental education, the biomedical sciences and research will be released. That is particularly true of research that increasingly relies on critical mass. Current research is about complex problems and requires big research teams and expensive equipment. Thirdly, the Bill has the overwhelming support of the respective councils of governors of the merging institutions, their staff and students. It has long been accepted that there are academic benefits--not least for students--as well as good administrative financial reasons for integrating free-standing medical schools into multi-faculty colleges.
As long ago as 1968, the royal commission on medical and dental education recommended that pre-clinical students should study in a multi-faculty environment--the London medical schools being unusual in being free-standing, independent schools. Since then, there have been a series of mergers of London medical schools with multi-faculty colleges: University College hospital medical school with University college London in 1979, St. Mary's hospital medical school with Imperial college, which are both in my constituency, in 1988, and the Middlesex hospital medical school with University college London in the same year.
'(1) The Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 is amended as follows.
(2) In section 18A (limitation of defamation and other actions), for subsection (1) substitute--
"(1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3) below and section 19A of this Act, no action for defamation shall be brought unless it is commenced within a period of one year after the date when the right of action accrued."
(3) In section 19A (power of court to override time-limits, etc).
(a) for subsection (1) substitute--
"(1) Where a person would be entitled, but for any of the provisions of section 17 or section 18 and 18A of this Act, to bring an action, the court may, if it seems equitable to do so, allow him to bring the action (or to bring any specified cause of action to which the action relates) notwithstanding that provision."
(b) after subsection (1) insert--
"(1A) In acting under this section in respect of causes of action falling within section 18A of this Act, the court shall have regard to all the circumstances of the case and in particular to--
(a) the degree to which the operation of section 18A of this Act prejudices the pursuer or any person whom he represents;
(b) the degree to which any decision of the court under this section would prejudice the defender or any person whom he represents;
(c) the length of, and the reasons for the delay on the part of the pursuer;
(d) where the reason or one of the reasons for the delay was that all or any of the facts relevant to the cause of action did not become known to the pursuer until after the end of the period mentioned in section 18A--
(i) the date on which any such facts did become known to him; and
(ii) the extent to which he acted promptly and reasonably once he knew whether or not the facts in question might be capable of giving rise to an action; and
(e) the extent to which, having regard to the delay, relevant evidence is likely--
(i) to be unavailable, or
(ii) to be less cogent than if the action had been brought within the period mentioned in section 18A.
(1B) In the case of an action for malicious falsehood brought by a personal representative, the references in subsection (1A) above to the pursuer shall be construed as including the deceased person to whom the cause of action accrued and any previous personal representative of that person."
(4) The amendments made by this section apply only to rights of action arising after the section comes into force.'.--[Mr. Brooke.]
Brought up, and read the First time.
'section (Limitation of actions: Scotland) (time limits for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood)'.
'5, 6 and (Limitation of actions: Scotland)'.
7 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |