I, too, support this group of amendments, particularly Amendment No. 238LF. I received an e-mail about the Bill at the weekend, which pointed out that as things stand, since local involvement networks have no independent legal personality, their members could be personally liable for their actions, even though they are discharging statutory functions. This contrasts sharply with the present position whereby patients’ forums are legal entities.
Amendment No. 238LF changes the definition of a LINk in Clause 223(2) from a person carrying on the activities specified in Clause 222(2) to, "““a body set up in pursuance of the arrangements specified in””,"
Clause 222(1). The amendment, therefore, would change LINks from groups of persons coalescing around a particular function or set of functions to a corporate legal entity. I submit that this is a much more satisfactory situation for the members of these local involvement networks and I believe, therefore, that this constitutes an ungainsayable argument for inserting Amendment No. 238LF into the Bill.
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Low of Dalston
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 July 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
694 c578 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:11:54 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_413451
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_413451
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_413451