---

NHS Redress Bill [Lords]

I shall not keep the Whips from their tea for more than a few moments but I cannot resist telling the Minister that he is in danger of making me change one of my after-dinner speeches. My limited experience of Standing Committees has been uniformly depressing and frustrating. When I served on a Committee a long time ago, a senior Member whispered in my ear that he had tabled 600 amendments and not one was accepted. Yet an amendment to the Bill has been accepted. That is absolutely brilliant and I commend the Minister for that. He will be known as a listening Minister, and I hope that that will not be perceived as a sign of weakness and that he will continue to listen and take points. Having said that, I still have two genuine worries. Sadly, I do not believe that we conveyed clearly what we meant by independence. I hope that the involvement of legal representation in the fact-finding part of the investigation will not increase the complexity of the process, make it adversarial or increase the stress levels for patients, relatives and staff. The medical profession abominate the involvement of the legal profession, as I am sure hon. Members realise. I hope that, in time, advantages will be perceived in aligning the redress scheme more closely with the NHS complaints procedure, as ““Making Amends”” suggested. Question put, That the Bill be now read the Third time:— The House divided: Ayes 253, Noes 160.