Proceeding contribution from Lord Lansley (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 6 September 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Health and Social Care Bill (Programme) (No. 3).
Health and Social Care Bill (Programme) (No. 3)
As far as the BMA is concerned, I was interested to read this morning a letter whose lead signatory was Hamish Meldrum, the chairman of the BMA council, whom I know well. It was curious because his objection to the Bill, which he wants to be amended, was about the introduction and extension of the role of ““any qualified provider””. However, that extension is not in the Bill. It is not occasioned by the Bill; it is a consequence of the way in which commissioners—[Interruption.] No, it does not. If there were no Bill, it would be open to strategic health authorities and primary care trusts to extend ““any qualified provider”” and patient choice in the NHS to whatever extent they wished. The Bill does not make that happen. The point is that under the legislation there is a stronger safeguarding process, because the commissioners—
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 532 c191
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Accountability Competition Health services Finance Health authorities General practitioners Private sector NHS Procurement NHS foundation trusts Social services Reorganisation Monitor NHS Commissioning Board
- Legislation
- Health and Social Care Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 18:17:37 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_766272
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_766272
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_766272