Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Neuberger (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 23 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on NHS Redress Bill [HL].


NHS Redress Bill [HL]

I thank the noble Lord for his question. He told me that the Healthcare Commission feels that it would have a conflict of interest. I am not sure that I truly believe that it is a conflict of interest, and I believe that it is possible to have Chinese walls in organisations. However, if that is not possible, that would be the only reason for looking at taking it away. My view is that the whole redress system should include to some extent complaints. That is why the noble Earl, Lord Howe, has emphasised the fact that we do not want all complaints taken forward, but those where people want an investigation, maybe an apology, and an assurance that what has happened will not happen again. That is not so very separate from some of the stuff that the Healthcare Commission is looking at anyway. The Healthcare Commission looks generally at quality within the service. So, to answer the question: I think that the Healthcare Commission could do both. The Minister may tell me that that is not possible, but I remain to be convinced. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendments Nos. 58 to 61 not moved.] Clause 11 agreed to. Clause 12 [Disclosure to scheme authority]:


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c419GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Complaints Compensation Civil proceedings Hospitals Legal representation NHS Patients Payments Negligence Solicitors Time limits Torts Patient advice and liaison services Health Service Commissioner NHS Litigation Authority Independent complaints advocacy services
Legislation
NHS Redress Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk