---

Health Bill

The hon. Lady was a member of the Health Committee and has great knowledge of the subject. Again, so as not to annoy the House, I shall simply say that I agree with her. I also agree with the Royal Pharmaceutical Society in highlighting the fact that, once again, the Bill allows for much of the detail of the changes to be written into the regulations that must be carefully drafted to deliver the benefits of flexibility for supervising pharmacists, while maintaining patient safety and ensuring that the Bill is not a short cut to spreading pharmacists over two or three pharmacy businesses. Part 4 addresses the deregulation of pharmaceutical services. I welcome that with caution. Several aspects of these proposals come on the back of the recommendations of the ““Over the Counter”” report of 2003. However, although the control of entry regulations 2003 report by the Health Committee, of which I was also a member, concludes that the current system of control of entry regulations is"““overly inflexible and in need of reform””," it goes on to say that the"““recommendations of the OTC report have the potential to make certain pharmacies unviable, potentially leaving some of the most vulnerable communities, who have the greatest health needs and are least able to travel long distances, without any local pharmacy provision, a situation that would be unacceptable.””" Therefore, I certainly stand by the Health Committee’s 2003 report. Although it is sensible that some of the restrictions on applications for contracts to dispense NHS prescriptions should be relaxed to deliver the best possible service to NHS patients, PCTs must retain the ability to plan the provision of local pharmacy services, and any reform to the regulatory framework should be unfolded in tandem with negotiations for a new payment system for pharmacies. Competition in the pharmacy sector should be supported only if it is proven to be compatible with a planned provision of pharmacy services that ensures provision in deprived areas. This is another Health Bill—more legislation, more regulation. It is true that the Bill frees up health care professionals from the restrictive regulations and requirements of previous legislation. However, my concern in all the points that I have made is that, by reforming the frameworks in which infection control, ophthalmic services or pharmacy and pharmaceutical industries operate, the Government must be careful and consistent throughout the drafting of the regulations so that this opportunity to provide more freedom and flexibility in local health care provision is not squandered by the creation of more targets and bureaucracy, because that burden will hit the health service even more heavily, given its already over-burdensome regulation.