---

Health Bill [HL]

I thank the Minister for his reply; I shall have to read in Hansard the first part of it, which I did not totally follow—the part that referred to the difference between "necessary" and "appropriate". I must admit that I got confused when listening to him. That is not his fault, but it is important that I totally understand what he is saying. However, I cannot help observing—I hope that the Minister will take this point away—that he mentioned that the wording in this part of the Bill is modelled directly on the wording of the 2006 Act. It is worth noting that although the Secretary of State needs only to consider it "appropriate" to make an order appointing a trust special administrator, Monitor under new Section 65D must be "satisfied" that the foundation trust is failing and likely to continue to fail. I suggest that that is a much stiffer test for Monitor. I wonder why the Government have not put the two on an equal footing. I shall just pick up one other point that the Minister made. He said that the Secretary of State did not have power to direct an individual, only the NHS body. In that case, I wonder why new Section 65H(7) refers to the Secretary of State directing the administrator. I am not taking issue with that provision, because if there are people whom the Secretary of State believes that the administrator should consult, he should consult them, but it does imply that there is a power of direction.