NHS Redress Bill [HL]

One of the main objectives of the NHS redress scheme is to provide a mechanism for resolving claims without the need to go to court, thereby avoiding the delays that are perceived to be inherent in the legal system. The scheme is intended to facilitate the resolution of cases in a swift manner, ensuring that redress is provided to the patient as quickly as possible. To achieve this, I believe that it is important that each stage of the process under the scheme is governed by time limits; provision is made for that in Clause 4(2)(c). The intention is to set out the time limits for each stage of the process in the scheme, and the aim is to resolve cases significantly quicker than the current average of about one and a half years for litigated cases. It should not be too difficult to improve on that kind of timescale. Amendment No. 21 allows the scheme to impose an overall time limit for the conclusion of proceedings under the scheme that could be exceeded only with the agreement of an independent person. I do not believe that we need to go along that route, as we intend to consult further on the matter of time limits when drafting secondary legislation to ensure that appropriate time limits are set. While the scheme seeks to produce speedy resolutions, patients may feel it more appropriate to focus on the outcome, rather than the time taken, and we will listen to their views. Should it become apparent, after further consultation with stakeholders, that an overall time limit for the conclusion of proceedings under the scheme would be appropriate, the general power set out in Clause 6 (1) would be sufficient to allow us to introduce such a time limit. Amendment No. 30 would allow the scheme to provide for a time limit with regards to the investigation and evidential stages of the scheme. Again, I intend to oppose this amendment, as we intend to consult further on the matter of time limits, and such a measure would be unnecessarily restrictive. The amendment would also remove the current power for the scheme to provide a time limit in relation to the acceptance of an offer under the scheme. That is inappropriate, because it is important for the proper functioning and administration of the scheme that there are time limits in that regard. Under the powers in Clause 7, we intend to provide that any time limit for bringing court proceedings in respect of a case that is being considered under the scheme is suspended for the duration of the scheme proceedings. The scheme is not intended to affect the legal rights of the patient, and it will stop the clock running as long as the case is being considered under the scheme. That protects a genuine choice for patients by ensuring that they will still have enough time to bring a case through the courts if they wish. It is therefore important that all parties are clear about when the suspension is to end; it would be inappropriate to have an indefinite period of suspension of any time limit for bringing court proceedings. That is our case for leaving well alone until we get into further consultation on some of the issues affected by Amendment No. 21 and parts of Amendment No. 30.