I have great sympathy with the principle of the amendment, because it states that the core principles of the NHS should be stated. We already have effectively four different NHS systems in the UK: devolution has meant that what is done in Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and England is at times very different. The experience of patients on one side or other of the border changes quite dramatically if they are referred across it. We have a unified taxation system, so the funding of the NHS is on a UK-wide basis. We do not fund the health service within a devolved Administration locally. In other words, we have a truly national, UK-wide health service, yet the constitution will apply to England. As it would be revised every three years, I am concerned that we may see some drift, that it may move with time away from the core principles of the NHS and that we will find that we have different systems in different places. It is therefore very important to define it.
I am concerned that ““evidence base”” does not feature in the words within the principles. I would like to see the evidence basis for what is done within the NHS flagged up as a core principle, because research and the accumulation of evidence should inform what is done. When there is no evidence, things should be abandoned and change thought about.
Health Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Finlay of Llandaff
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 February 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Health Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
708 c6-7GC Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:34:53 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530516
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530516
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530516