---

Health and Social Care Bill

I welcome this group of amendments, which delivers some of the changes that we were looking for, notably the inclusion of LINks—Local Involvement Networks—carers and service users, and proper representation for those with experience of health care, social care and functions under the Mental Health Act 1983. Unfortunately, it still fails to give the full independence needed for an effectively functioning regulator. Amendment No. 1, which simply creates space for amendments Nos. 2 and 3, is uncontroversial. Amendment No. 2 inserts a new clause on the commission's objectives. I welcome that new clause, brought forward by the Government, as it responds to Conservative amendments from the other place and this House. I pay tribute to those on the Conservative Front Bench in the other place, particularly my noble Friend Earl Howe, on winning so many concessions from the Government. Indeed, a large number of the substantive Government amendments before us today come as a direct result of amendments tabled by Conservative Front Benchers in Grand Committee. Members of the Committee in this House will well remember that amendment No. 2 was originally tabled, in similar terms, by me, supported by my right hon. and hon. Friends and others from other Opposition parties—and the Minister is now introducing it himself. In Committee in this House, the Minister said:"““we believe that the essence and desires behind the new clause are already in the Bill””" and called attempts to lay out the objectives"““flawed and unnecessary””––[Official Report, Health and Social Care Public Bill Committee, 15 January 2008; c. 186.]" I hope that the Minister will take the opportunity to explain to the House why his colleagues in the other place disagreed, and whether he still considers such an amendment ““flawed and unnecessary””. Surely it would have saved much parliamentary time to have accepted the amendment in Committee in this place.