NHS Redress Bill [HL]

I rise to support the very long list of amendments that we are discussing. We on the Liberal Democrat Benches support these amendments because we agree completely with the sentiments of the noble Earl, Lord Howe, regarding the issues of separation and the need for independence. We made most of those points at Second Reading. We are worried that the scheme as presently designed seems to give all the power to the NHS Litigation Authority. That authority has interests which may not be the same as the interests of those who have a complaint or, indeed, are pressing a case of negligence. We really find that quite worrying. We support the intentions behind the Bill. We know that many bodies within the National Health Service and many user groups are passionate about wanting a redress system to work that is a considerable improvement. We probably would not go all the way with the sort of scheme outlined by the noble Earl, Lord Howe. We could contemplate a two-stage scheme where there is an independent body—possibly the Healthcare Commission but that is for further debate—which is in charge of the investigation, the apology and all of that, and then passing on to another authority to deal with the redress. We could contemplate that. We would want to be convinced that this is a two-stage thing. We do not like the idea of one authority being in charge. There needs to be some kind of separation. To make the point more profoundly, I should like to read a very short extract from an answer made by the Prime Minister about the Child Support Agency on 16 November. He made no defence of the present situation with the Child Support Agency and argued:"““The CSA is in an extremely difficult position for a very simple reason, and it is as well that we are absolutely frank about that. It is the investigating agency, then it is the adjudicating agency, and then it is the enforcement agency. That is an extremely difficult situation, and the staff who have to work in the present system do so in conditions of very great difficulty””.—[Official Report, Commons, 16/11/05; col. 964.]" I am extremely grateful to my noble friend Lady Tonge for pointing that extract out because it seems absolutely apposite to the moment. These functions cannot be carried out all together. We believe that it is really important to press these amendments that we support, precisely because we want separation; that is, investigation on the one hand and redress on the other—not together.