Proceeding contribution from Lord Patel (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Monday, 27 February 2012. It occurred during Debate on bill on Health and Social Care Bill.
Health and Social Care Bill
My Lords, I support the amendments relating to conflict of interest and I agree that there needs to be something in the Bill. I will give an example to indicate why I believe that more strongly following a seminar that we attended before the Recess. For those noble Lords who were not there, we had a presentation from a GP who told us, first, that he was salaried, and I therefore presume he did not have a standard general medical services contract, and that his salary came from somewhere else—it may well have come from another general practitioner. He said, secondly, that he was involved in commissioning and, thirdly, that the commissioners had found that the provision of some services in his area was not satisfactory or of the quality that they had asked for—particularly, in relation to hand surgery. They therefore set up an independent provider of surgical services, of which the GP was a non-executive director. The conflicts of interest are quite obvious: here is a commissioner who is a salaried doctor, and that raises a question. If the commissioning board is to hold the contracts of primary care providers, will they not include those who have a general medical services contract, or will they include those who are salaried? More and more primary care providers are salaried GPs employed by other practitioners. We therefore also need to clarify who will be asked to be a member of the commissioning group: will it be only those who hold the general medical services contract, or will it be all those who provide primary care services? The conflict of interest here is many-fold, and therefore we need to address how it is to be resolved. While I was, and still am, very attracted to the amendments of the noble Baroness, Lady Barker, because I had not seen those of the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, the question of sanctions needs to be addressed more clearly. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, on the need for this question of sanctions to be clarified so that those who may be involved in conflict know from the very beginning how those sanctions will apply to them.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 735 c1061-2
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Codes of practice Accountability Competition Conflict of interests Health Health services Fees and charges Education Health authorities Learning disability NHS Patients Mental health services Negligence National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Standards Voluntary organisations Training Safety Reform Research Social services Social enterprises Care Quality Commission NHS Commissioning Board National Institute for Health and Care Research Clinical commissioning groups
- Legislation
- Health and Social Care Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 15:36:57 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_812232
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_812232
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_812232