Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Cumberlege (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 25 May 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Health Bill.

Health Bill

Before the Minister sits down, I am very relieved to hear that there is no third list, as I understood that there was. If the optometrists are already being scrutinised by the PCT to get on the list, I cannot understand why it is necessary to have this measure for 48-hours’ notice to be given to the PCT before a visit is made. The optometrists are already registered with the General Optical Council and have already been assessed to provide domiciliary services in terms of equipment. I therefore wonder why this 48-hour notice is necessary.

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
682 c274GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Children Disclosure of information Fraud Health Health hazards Personal records Public appointments Older people Ophthalmic services Testing Appointments Commission Glaucoma
Legislation
Health Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk