|Health and Social Care Bill
Mr. Swayne: I acknowledge that the purpose of amendment No. 180 is achieved by Government amendment No. 152. Before I ask leave to withdraw the amendment, I want to put it in on the record that we tabled our amendment first.
The Chairman: Order. The only amendment moved in a group is the first on the list. The hon. Gentleman's amendment was not moved.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments made: No. 152, page 23, line 14, at end insert
No. 153, in page 23, line 15 after `review' insert `of a contingent removal'.
No. 154, page 23, line 19, at end insert
No. 108, in page 23, line 21, leave out `conditional' and insert `contingent'.[Mr. Denham.]
Mr. Denham: I beg to move amendment No. 155, in page 23, line 31, leave out `and'.
The Chairman: With this we may take Government amendments Nos. 156 and 157.
Mr. Denham: In new section 49K in clause 26, there is already provision for the appeals authority to decide to nationally disqualify a practitioner from the principal and supplementary lists of all health authorities; it was referred to earlier as national disqualification. However, in the Bill as drafted there is no reference to national disqualification from the PMS or PDS lists, which we shall discuss in clause 27. Amendment No. 157 inserts a reference to those services lists that correct that anomaly and therefore enables the FHSAA to disqualify a practitioner from all lists. Amendment No. 155 is a consequential amendment that corrects the grammar and amendment No. 156 is similarly a drafting amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments made: No. 156, in page 23, line 32, leave out `practitioners' and insert `individuals.'
No. 157, in page 23, line 34, at end insert
( ) any services list of individuals of the practitioner's description prepared by any Health Authority under section 28DA above or under section 8ZA of the National Health Service (Primary Care) Act 1997,
or any such list (or lists) of a description (or descriptions) specified by the FHSAA in its decision'.[Mr. Denham.]
Mr. Denham: I beg to move amendment No. 158, in page 24, line 4, leave out from beginning to end of line 7.
Subsection 49K(5) provides that if following an appeal by a practitioner the appeals authority decides to revoke its decision nationally to disqualify that practitioner, the FHSAA must also confirm or revoke the original health authority decision to move the practitioner from its list or to substitute a contingent removal. There is no reason to revoke the original decision and the amendment therefore deletes the unnecessary wording.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr. Brand: I beg to move amendment No. 32, in page 24, line 8, leave out `may' and insert `shall'.
The Chairman: With this we may take Government amendment No. 159 and amendment No. 33, in page 24, line 9, after `profession', insert
Dr. Brand: I apologise to the Committee as the amendment seems to have gained something in translation. It should have readI realise it makes the amendment slightly incompetent
Mr. Denham: I listened with care to what the hon. Member for Isle of Wight said and to the questions he asked, but I thought that his amendment was about something entirely different. I shall deal with my interpretation of what it would do, and I shall briefly talk about the question that he has raised, which will save us dealing with it in the stand part debate.
The issue that I thought we were dealing with is that of notification of health authority decisions to remove and suspend practitioners from their main list. It is obviously important, in the system that we are setting up, that robust mechanisms are in place to inform all health authorities of the removal or suspension of practitioners, so that people cannot be moved from one list simply to re-enter the NHS in another part of the country without anyone knowing anything about it.
We intend to put in place a comprehensive alert letter system ensuring that health authorities, regulatory bodies and the Department of Health are fully appraised of the removal and suspension of primary care practitioners. We also intendand this is what I understood to be the import of the amendmentto introduce regulations to underpin an alert letter system. The provision in amendment No. 159 will go further than that proposed in amendment No. 32 in ensuring that all relevant bodies are properly informed of these key decisions.
The hon. Gentleman raised an important issue, which we may be able to debate at greater length on stand part. Provision will be made to protect the financial position of a suspended principal or a member--for example a GP--of the practice. We will also need to make provision for locums who are under suspension, which will require a different route to be constructed because clearly they are not directly on a payrollif I can use that expression.
The importance of appropriately protecting the financial position of somebody who has been suspended has been recognised, and I can reassure the hon. Gentleman on that point. I am sure that these amendments are not the place to discuss the matter in detail.
Dr. Brand: I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdraw.
Amendments made: No. 159, in page 24, line 9, leave out
. Regulations may provide for circumstances in which a practitioner
(a) whom a Health Authority are investigating in order to see whether there are grounds for exercising their powers under section 49F, 49G or 49H, or
(b) who has been suspended under section 49H,
may not withdraw from a list in which he is included.'.
No. 161, in page 24, leave out line 22 and insert
No. 162, in page 24, line 25, at end insert
49MA.(1) This section applies where it appears to the Secretary of State that there is provision in Scotland or Northern Ireland under which a person corresponding to a practitioner may be dealt with in any way which corresponds (whether or not exactly) with a way in which a practitioner may be dealt with under this group of sections.
(2) A decision in Scotland or Northern Ireland to deal with such a person in such a way is referred to in this section as a ``corresponding decision''.
(4) That effect need not be the same as the effect of the decision in the place where it was made.
(5) The regulations may not provide for a corresponding decision to be reviewed or revoked in England and Wales.'.[Mr. Denham.]
Clause 26, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
|©Parliamentary copyright 2001||Prepared 25 January 2001|