Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Neuberger (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 15 October 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill.


Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

My Lords, the noble Earl, Lord Howe, has, as ever, said most of what needs to be said. But perhaps I can emphasise again to noble Lords around the House just how many letters those of us who have been involved in this Bill have all had about all the issues to do with LINks and, most of all, about the pace of change and the abolition of patients’ forums before the new system is up and running. I have had literally hundreds of letters. We have also had support from the Local Government Association. It sent me a note today supporting our concerns, saying that local authorities need adequate time to implement these measures. It is also worth saying that David Pink—who will be well known to many people around this House as chief executive of the Long-term Conditions Alliance—has argued that, although the delay should not be too long, because there has already been enough uncertainty, "““in most areas of the country little preparation has been done, and there is precious little time left. There is a danger that, after a long, long uncertainty, the new LINks will fail to thrive because of lack of preparation. That is not to say we would favour an indefinite stay on the change—there has already been far too long a period when everyone knew that the Government intended to reform the PPI and Forums. A further long delay would certainly anger loyal volunteers working on Forums, and would frustrate those who have done some preparation based on the expected April 2008 date””." He is advocating something between three and six months. One of the reasons for six months to be in the amendment is that that is the view of people who are not necessarily pleading their own corner but are trying to work with the new system. He adds that he is making the statement, "““on behalf of the 110 national service user organisations””," that are members of the Long-terms Conditions Alliance, and says that, "““most have yet to be contacted about involving their branches in LINks, and very few have the information they need about LINks to support them when they start””." For that reason, I very much hope that the Minister will support the amendment and recognise that some time for a transition arrangement is needed.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
695 c588-9 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disciplinary proceedings Disability Disclosure of information Councillors Convictions Byelaws Housing Health services Legislative competence Functions Ethics Local government Misconduct Public participation Local government executive NHS foundation trusts Standards Social rented housing Social services Unitary councils Overview and scrutiny committees Patients' forums Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health Local strategic partnerships Local area agreements Local involvement networks
Legislation
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk