Once again, I want to say a few words on behalf of UNISON. It is concerned about the spread of pilots, and it says: ""Given the huge impact that the introduction … could have on patients … UNISON is very concerned that the Bill does not outline a satisfactorily detailed pilot scheme. While we welcome the fact that a pilot process has been written into the Bill, we believe that any pilot process would need to ensure sufficient consideration by the Secretary of State before a decision … is taken. The whole piloting process will lack credibility if it is not thorough, independent, transparent and detailed and UNISON would urge the Government to give more statutory assurances that this will be the case"."
In my amendment, I argue that strategic health authorities in different parts of the country are faced with different problems. It might well be that the arrangements that apply in central London will be very different from the arrangements that exist in west Cumberland, from whence I cometh, south Wales, the north-east or wherever. It is important that we get a wide spread. I hope that in replying on the amendment my noble friend will assure us that this will proceed only on the basis that there is that kind of national coverage and that every condition in every part of the United Kingdom is covered by whatever arrangement is made.
Health Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Campbell-Savours
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 2 March 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Health Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
708 c245-6GC Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:13:51 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_532923
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_532923
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_532923