Once again, the Committee will be grateful to the noble Baroness for her reply. I am glad that work is currently going on with the Local Government Association on how a transparent and fair system of funding of LINks could be best established. That is good news. I am sorry that the noble Baroness could not go further and give the Committee some idea as to what levers might be pulled by Ministers or others to prevent a situation arising where the activities listed in Clause 222(2) are performed in only a minimal way as a result of inadequate funding in a given instance. Like the noble Baroness, I am no advocate of ring-fencing, but there are dangers when ring-fencing does not apply—the obvious one being that the activities in question are not safeguarded
Nevertheless, the noble Baroness has shed some useful light on this area. There are questions that remain open, the principal one being the quantum of money that will be directed to this area, which for obvious reasons she cannot be specific about at this juncture. But it was helpful to hear that it will be comparable to the sum currently directed towards patients’ forums and we can take comfort from that. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Earl Howe
(Conservative)
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 c620-1 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:37:50 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_413500
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_413500
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_413500