UK Parliament / Open data

Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 238T: 238T: Clause 224, page 155, line 42, leave out ““dealing with”” and insert ““responding to”” The noble Earl said: I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 238U and 238UA. The heading of Clause 224 is: "““Duties of services-providers to respond to local involvement networks””." However, when we read on we find that this is not quite what the clause says. In delineating the regulations which the Secretary of State may make, it refers first to services providers responding to requests for information from a LINk. That is fine. But then, in relation to reports or recommendations made by a LINk or by another services provider, the words ““responding to”” are replaced by ““dealing with””. What is the significance of that? I can ““deal with”” a report or recommendation by ignoring it altogether and putting it in the wastepaper basket. I can ““deal with”” it by reading it, disagreeing with it and taking no further action. In other words, I can deal with it without having to account to anyone else about what I have done and why. I am not sure that it is appropriate or in the spirit of the clause to have the words ““dealing with”” in this context, which is why I suggest that the words ““responding to”” might be better. It will be helpful to hear what the Government have in mind to put in regulations here. On Amendment No. 238UA, we come back to the issue of outcomes as opposed to mere processes. Services providers are to have duties conferred on them to respond to requests for information and to deal with reports and recommendations; but nowhere here is there any sense that they are supposed to take action to improve services where there is a clear case for doing so. Not all reports or recommendations from a LINk will be persuasive but when they are, someone ought to be concerned with taking the recommendations forward, otherwise the whole exercise might just as well not have been started. I should be glad if the Minister could reassure me on this point. I beg to move.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

694 c653 

Session

2006-07

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top