UK Parliament / Open data

NHS Redress Bill [HL]

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Royall of Blaisdon (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 15 February 2006. It occurred during Debate on bills on NHS Redress Bill [HL].
moved Amendment No. 43: Leave out Clause 12. The noble Baroness said: My Lords, Clause 12(1) disapplies the common law duties of confidentiality in relation to the disclosure of information required by the scheme to the scheme authority. On further reflection, we now consider that unnecessary. Since Committee, officials have discussed disclosure in more detail with the NHSLA, which handles the clinical negligence scheme for trusts. We now consider that, under the redress scheme, it is right for patient consent to be sought before any information covered by the common law duties of confidentiality is disclosed to the scheme authority. Where a patient refuses to give consent, it may not be possible to proceed with the case. It is intended that that will be made clear to patients when the initial request to disclose information to the scheme authority is made. Subsection (1) of Clause 12, which Amendment No. 43 deletes, is therefore unnecessary. Amendment No. 43 also deletes subsection (2). Following further discussions with the Department for Constitutional Affairs, we are now of the opinion that Clause 12(2) duplicates the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998. Subsection (2) provides that a person may not be required to disclose information to the scheme authority in relation to which he is under a duty of non-disclosure under the Data Protection Act. We consider the clause unnecessary and believe it should be omitted. The duties of non-disclosure under the Data Protection Act will apply in any event. I beg to move. On Question, amendment agreed to. Clause 14 [Complaints]:

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

678 c1204-5 

Session

2005-06

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top