Proceeding contribution from Lord Lansley (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 21 November 2007. It occurred during Opposition day on Health Care-Associated Infections.
Health Care-Associated Infections
My hon. Friend makes an important point. If the Secretary of State had taken the action clearly indicated in the report and used his powers under section 66 to remove or suspend the board and put new leadership in place, my hon. Friend and his constituents would know that that leadership would be permanent and would take the necessary action. However, the Secretary of State did not do that. He hides behind the Healthcare Commission, but that is not its responsibility. It should investigate problems and report on them. It is the responsibility of the strategic health authority in the first instance, the NHS chief executive in the second instance, and Ministers in the third instance to exercise the power of performance management and, if necessary, to intervene. They have the powers under NHS legislation, but they did not use it. The Minister of State, Department of Health, the hon. Member for Exeter (Mr. Bradshaw) is always telling me that a consequence of our policy would be a lack of accountability to Parliament. Ninety patients died—[Interruption.] Indeed, since September 2006, there have been further deaths associated with C. difficile at the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust this year. Who has come to the House to be held accountable for that? If Ministers are genuinely accountable, they should have used the powers that they claim are so important and done something about the problem. If they are not prepared to use them in those circumstances, in what circumstances would they use them? Part of the report entitled ““Developments since the investigation was announced”” describes ““musical chairs”” among senior executives. There were further outbreaks of C. difficile in January in the Kent and Sussex hospital; in April at Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells; and in May and June there were 45 new cases of C. difficile at Maidstone, and nine deaths. I am not arguing that the failings disclosed up to September 2006 have continued to anything like the same extent, but it is perfectly clear from the report that things that should have been done have not been done. The policies were not shown on the departmental intranet. Earlier this year, the Healthcare Commission said that it was still observing patients with diarrhoea on open wards, and it saw patients with MRSA being barrier-nursed on such wards. What was done to ensure that the new management at the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust was in place at the right time? The Secretary of State did not take the action that he should have taken. He should be accountable to the House for that simple fact.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 467 c1262-3
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Admissions Hospitals Disease control Hygiene Infectious diseases Hospital beds NHS Patients Managers MRSA Screening Cleaning services Clostridium Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 01:54:12 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_423724
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_423724
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_423724