---

Health and Social Care Bill

I do not intend to detain the House for long. I shall confine my comments to the amendments that are before us, rather than those that we may wish were before us. I must come clean about Lords amendments Nos. 48 and 49. When I first read them, I thought, ““This is a bit worrying: it effectively allows the Department for Work and Pensions and HMRC to share information.”” Then I realised that that provision was already in the Bill. It is probably remiss of us—I hold up my hand as guilty—not to have examined that in Committee. I share the concern expressed by the hon. Member for Eddisbury (Mr. O'Brien). As the matter was not discussed in Committee, it would be helpful if the Minister could clarify the nature of the information likely to be shared, and the mechanisms that exist for the limiting and auditing of information sharing so that the ““health in pregnancy”” reason is not given when some other purpose is being served. That would be reassuring, in the light of the public interest in data sharing and data security. If the Minister does not have the details to hand, I am sure that many of us would like to be given the information at some stage. I welcome Lords amendment No. 50 and the consequential amendments relating to pharmaceutical services. I should record the fact that I am on the register of practising pharmaceutical chemists, and therefore have a potential interest. I welcome the reassurance that pharmacists will not necessarily find after investing in their businesses that local decisions will not support the services in which they have invested. It is difficult for companies to develop a strategy if numerous different provisions exist. We need to be reassured that plans to devolve the arrangements further will be subject to further scrutiny, because the issue is not straightforward. However, people to whom I have spoken who were concerned about the original provision in the Bill are pleased about the amendment, and I thank the Minister for it.