Health and Social Care Bill

My Lords, in responding to this group I should like first to raise on behalf of my noble friend Lady Thornton the issue of the register of risks on the Health and Social Care Bill. I also apologise on her behalf for not raising the matter at the appropriate time. In the debate on the Motion of Regret on 7 December several noble Lords referred to the starting point of Report being timed so that the appeal on the Information Commissioner’s report will have been completed and the House will know the result. The Minister himself said: "““I am as keen as anyone to see the matter speedily resolved””.—[Official Report, 7/12/11; col. 736.]" The usual channels are, of course, discussing the next stage of the Bill. We agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Williams, about the risk of this issue not being resolved in time for the next stage. On 7 December, she said: "““I fear that it may hang like a dark shadow over the whole of the Report stage””.—[Official Report, 7/12/11; col. 726.]" In the same debate the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, said: "““I believe the solution proposed by my noble friend””—" the noble Baroness, Lady Williams— "““is the best one … that an expedited decision should be sought from the tribunal””.—[Official Report, 7/11/12; col. 731.]" I have asked my noble friend the opposition Chief Whip, and appeal to the usual channels, not to finalise the arrangements for Report and the timetable until the House has an answer to the question. Our understanding is that a normal timescale, if we are lucky, might mean that we will have a tribunal decision in late February. The Government will then have the option of appealing to the Upper Tribunal. Does the Secretary of State intend to seek expedition of this process? What steps have Ministers taken to ensure that the appeal is heard as early as possible? The Minister can, if he wishes, respond in writing to my noble friend, though obviously he will need to do it as soon as possible. I shall also speak briefly to this group of amendments generally. I support the amendments tabled by my noble friend Lord Warner and the noble Lord, Lord Patel, all of which seek to strengthen the Secretary of State’s duty to prepare and publish information standards governing the collection, processing and dissemination of information on the provision of NHS health and adult social care. I know that the Minister is in favour of having light-touch definitions in the Bill, but we strongly support being more specific about what the information standard is to be, what it is for and what it should include. The definition proposed in Amendment 347A underlines that it must include, "““the efficient and effective collection … of information that””—" most importantly— "““benefits the commissioning and provision of health and adult social care services””." It is equally important to specify that the standard includes the provision of information that will help improve public health and well-being and assist the public’s ability to make informed choices about care and treatment. We also support Amendment 347B, from the noble Lord, Lord Low, which seeks to ensure that the, "““information standard must include a requirement to record patients’ preferred reading format: standard print, large print, audio or Braille””." We support the general aim of this part of the Bill: to place the current health and social care information centre on a firmer statutory footing, replacing the current special health authority. We have a number of issues to raise, and will do so in the next group.