---

Health and Social Care Bill

Section 164 of the NHS Act 2006 allows the Secretary of State to authorise any primary care trust or other person to exercise the functions of determining authorities in relation to the making or varying of a determination on the remuneration of those providing NHS pharmaceutical services. Section 164(5)(b) sets out that the instrument of appointment may be contained in regulations. This amendment seeks to remove the current discretion in Section 164 and instead provide that regulations should set out the determining authority for remuneration of those services that are part of the national element of the community pharmacy contractual framework; namely essential services. The intention is to ensure that the Secretary of State will continue to determine remuneration for these national elements. I am aware that the noble Baroness’s honourable friend in another place spoke on this, and he spoke to me about it recently. I recognise the concerns that this amendment seeks to address, and I hope I will be able reassure the noble Baronesses. The noble Baroness, Lady Cumberlege, knows that I am in sympathy with her remarks. I did not think they were a rant but were informative and helpful to the Committee in understanding the context of this amendment. In consulting on the proposal to transfer funding for pharmaceutical services to PCTs, we indicated that the Secretary of State would continue to set the fees and allowances for the national elements of the community pharmacy contractual framework in line with provisions in Section 164(3)(a) of the NHS Act 2006. I am happy to state on the record that the Government remain fully committed to our view that fees and allowances for essential services and advanced services should continue to be determined nationally in negotiation with the Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee and in discussion with the NHS. It is not sensible for pharmacy contractors or PCTs to negotiate such payments on an individual basis. That would place complex and inappropriate administrative burdens on the NHS and community pharmacy. For example, it could involve PCTs and pharmacy businesses operating complex payment and monitoring systems against different sets of fees and allowances. The level of fees and allowances for essential and advanced services will continue to be set nationally and payments to contractors must reflect that. PCTs will be unable to vary nationally agreed levels of funding. This approach mirrors that taken in other national primary care contracts, such as general medical services, for example. In the light of that explanation, I hope that the noble Baroness will withdraw her amendment.