I understand entirely my noble friend’s response to my amendment. I am very pleased with that. No doubt I and other noble Lords will spend at least part of 2012 making sure that we hold the Government’s hand to the flame on that review. I wanted to respond to what she said about the amendment in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Patel of Bradford, which I very much support. The first scenario that the Law Society and others were trying to probe in that amendment was one where it was unclear whether or not a patient came under the auspices of a CCG. The second was what would happen if a CCG decided not to commission a particular type of service—for example, some kind of psychological therapy—and it did so independently and not in discussion with the social services authority. I was not clear from the noble Baroness’s answer whether in her discussions with the noble Lord, Lord Patel, she would be covering both those eventualities.
Health and Social Care Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Barker
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 5 December 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Health and Social Care Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
733 c603-4 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 19:05:12 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791947
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791947
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791947