NHS Redress Bill [HL]

The Government are always very careful about inserting four letter words into any legislation. For the scheme to deliver all that we want it to deliver and that it can deliver, we believe that it must be supported by a culture change to ensure a more open environment in which healthcare professionals can speak out and provide open and honest explanations. As part of this openness, the expectation is that patients will be provided with a full and open explanation under the scheme. We envisage that the scheme authority will publish guidance to scheme members concerning their functions under the scheme, including sharing examples of good practice as appropriate. We intend that this will include guidance on matters to be covered in an explanation to encourage the move towards a more open culture where full and open explanations are provided as a matter of course. While I agree that the provision of full and open explanations will be key to the success of the scheme, I am not sure that it is appropriate to set out this requirement on the face of the Bill. It would be fair to say that many scheme members will need flexibility to tailor their response when things go wrong according to the individual needs of each patient. How an explanation is given and what it involves is best laid out in guidance drawn up in consultation with stakeholders. To give an example, there may be circumstances in which it is not appropriate to provide a comprehensive explanation where the applicant is not the patient and there may be unresolved issues around the disclosure of medical records or personal information. Discretion is required to enable the secondary legislation to exempt rare cases from the compulsory requirement under the scheme to provide explanations. As noble Lords often expect from a Minister, we are asking for a little flexibility to cope with this matter in guidance, rather than putting it on the face of the Bill.