Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Peyton of Yeovil: My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister. He has just mentioned a "backstop power". That is one of those phrases which always leaves behind frayed nerve endings. Obviously it is very difficult for the occupants of the Government Front Bench to envisage the possibility of someone other than themselvessomeone not as wise, not as patient, not as perceptive, not as sensitivedoing rough and stupid things. That is what worries noble Lords on this side of the House.
However, I have to tell the Minister that my confidence in him is far greater than any confidence I may have in his Secretary of State.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, I shall pass on that.
A backstop power is surely the evidence of public accountability. If we were to take the arguments raised by noble Lords in relation to a number of national bodiesnon-departmental public bodieswhere they seek simply to make them independent, beyond parliamentary scrutiny and without any proper accountability to the Secretary of State, then I do not believe that we would be serving the interests of the nation. It is not right simply to park such bodies offshore and let them get on with it. There needs to be in place a proper framework of accountability and one needs to have some reserve powers.
However, of course these are reserve powers and it is our intention to ensure that the commission, alongside the other national bodies we have discussed, is very well able to discharge its responsibilities in an independent way. But we also need to have in place the proper forms of parliamentary accountability. I think that we have the balance right.
I hope that my announcement today that the appointment of the chair of the commission will not be made by the Secretary of State but by the NHS Appointments Commission will go a long way towards allaying the concerns that have been expressed.
Lord Clement-Jones: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply, which fell into two parts. He gave an extremely unconvincing response to Amendment No. 53; and evoked growing interest in his response to the other amendments. Certainly the Minister's undertaking in regard to Amendment No. 86that the chair will be appointed by the NHS appointments commissionis very helpful, as also is his clarification in regard to Amendment No. 85. Pending further clarification, we shall not press Amendments Nos. 85 to 90 as the Minister has gone some way towards satisfying those of us who do not wish to see the commission as a tame poodle.
I should say to the noble Earl that my speeches in Committee are far better than they are on Report; they contain more colourful phrases. His "command and control" phrase was far superior to mine.
The Minister has gone some way but he continues to wriggle about the powers of the national commission. We do not wish to throw away the benefits that we have had from the ability of the Association of Community Health Councils to campaign on matters affecting patients. I read out a short list of matters on which ACHCEW currently is able to workresearch and policy; conducting casualty watch type exercises; running or engaging in national campaigns or making donations to them; campaigning about national changes of policy affecting the health service; and commenting on guidance issued by bodies such as the GMC beyond those concerns. The Minister did not give me an ounce of satisfaction in that regard.
Many of us fear that the circumscribed role of the commission is entirely designed to ensure that ACHCEW is not reborn in another form. As we value its work, we believe that would be a retrograde stephence the reason for wishing to insert these powers for the new commission in the Bill. I therefore wish not to withdraw the amendment but to test the opinion of the House on Amendment No. 53.
On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 53) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 119; Not-Contents, 122.
Resolved in the negative, and amendment disagreed to accordingly.
6.32 p.m.
Lord Clement-Jones moved Amendment No. 54:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
[Amendment No. 55 not moved.]
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page