I am very grateful to the Minister for that encouraging reply. The fact that there is no current intention to use the power raises the question of why the power is needed at all. Of course, all governments like to have flexibility. I understand that. But, ironically—paradoxically in this case—if the flexibility were to be exercised, it would produce rigidity. Once you restrict the amount of compensation on a particular head of claim, it could produce the kinds of unfair and perverse consequences that I referred to earlier. I welcome what the Minister said. I would genuinely encourage him to look again at the issue. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 17 not moved.]
On Question, Whether Clause 3 shall stand part of the Bill?
NHS Redress Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Earl Howe
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 21 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on NHS Redress Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c357-8GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:15:51 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277752
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277752
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277752