Select Committee on Health Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Question 40)

PROFESSOR CELIA DAVIES, DR ED MAYO AND DR JONATHAN TRITTER

1 FEBRUARY 2007

  Q40  Jim Dowd: My question strikes at the heart of public administration generally. All the witnesses alluded to this matter in earlier questioning but I want an answer from only one of them. How does one avoid a position where having consulted on a particular issue one gets different, sometimes conflicting, responses and a decision is made which is acceptable to some but clearly not to others? Those who agree think that it has been open and transparent and is a model of its kind; the rest think that it is cosmetic.

  Dr Mayo: I would say that it is about building confidence in the quality of the process. For example, some years ago the National Consumer Council developed guidelines that became the guidelines for central government in terms of national consultations. I am sure that further improvements are required in exactly that field, but if equality of process and some confidence in it is built up it will alleviate some of what you describe in terms of the losers crying foul.

  Chairman: I thank all of the witnesses for coming to help us in this evidence session. We hope that our report will coincide with the emergence of the Bill from committee at about Easter time. We do not know whether or not we will get there in view of the timetable, but we will let you know in due course.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2007
Prepared 20 April 2007