---

Mental Health Bill [Lords]

I certainly accept that some psychiatrists are worried about other people taking on the responsibilities that we have defined. I also accept that the hon. Gentleman has moved some way from his previous position, but his amendment No. 93 makes it very likely that a person who does not even know the patient could override the decision of the patient’s responsible clinician. The vast majority of approved clinicians will be psychiatrists, at least initially. Under his amendment, it would probably be necessary to go outside the team, or even the hospital, to find an approved clinician who belonged to a different profession from the responsible clinician. That may not be the intention of his amendment, but it is certainly a result of it. Amendment No. 73, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon, is unnecessary because the tribunal is an independent judicial body that can seek evidence from whomever it chooses. Amendments Nos. 70 and 73 assume that only a doctor or a clinical psychologist can provide objective medical expertise, but I assure my hon. Friend that the statutory competence requirements will ensure that all responsible clinicians can provide objective medical expertise. Again, amendment No. 70 would allow a doctor or clinical psychologist who might not even know the patient to override the decision of the responsible clinician. We do not think that that is a desirable approach. It could lead to inappropriate discharge, which I am sure is not what my hon. Friend would want, and that would put the patient, their family or even the general public at risk. I hope that my hon. Friend will withdraw his amendment, and I hope that the Opposition will withdraw theirs, but I also hope that my hon. Friend and the Opposition will continue to work with us, and that we will be able to convince them on the subject of competences, which will ensure very high standards, in terms of the responsibilities that we want to give to the responsible clinician.