|
Mr. Wiggin: I do, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend for bringing that up. I have a quote from Jane Hutt, who says:
''I am not being prescriptive, but I am saying we need to use regulations not to tie down the Wales Centre for Health, but at least provide the appropriate routes into the Wales Centre for Health and provide more clarity on the routes into the Wales Centre for Health.''
We are trying to clarify the amount of influence that the Welsh Assembly should have over the centre, and whether this aspect of the Bill would allow the centre to be a scapegoat should something go wrong. Removing paragraphs 6 and 7 would tidy up the Bill, so I am curious to hear why the Minister feels it is so important to leave them in.
Mr. Touhig: The amendment would remove the provision that enables the Assembly to give directions to the Wales Centre for Health to remedy a serious failure in the centre's performance. That provision is essential for the Assembly to maintain proper oversight of the centre's work. Surely it would be wrong if the Assembly had no powers to intervene if it were aware of major financial mismanagement or administrative malpractice in the centre.
Mr. Wiggin: Paragraph 9 says:
''The Centre must comply with any direction given by the Assembly under this Schedule.''
Everything that the Minister has said would still apply if paragraphs 6 and 7 were removed.
5.45 pm
Mr. Touhig: I am sure that if I say a few more words about the matter, what I am trying to get at might become clear to the hon. Gentleman. As I said, we want to ensure the independence of the centre. However, we also took account of the concerns that the Select Committee on Welsh Affairs—of which he is a member—expressed at the pre-legislative scrutiny stage. The hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell helpfully reminded the hon. Gentleman of what that Committee said.
I remind hon. Members that when the draft schedule 2 was first published and put out for scrutiny, under ''Assembly directions'', we said:
''In exercising any function, the Centre must comply with any direction given by the Assembly for Wales.''
We have taken account of the concerns that were expressed during pre-legislative scrutiny, and the Bill has been amended accordingly. Now, the Assembly will be able to intervene only when there is a serious failure, and it must give reasons for doing so under
Column Number: 062
paragraph 7. We believe that that is not only a proper and adequate safeguard against any misuse of power by the Assembly or interference with the centre's work, but a backstop. If there is serious financial or other malpractice, a body must be able to intervene in order to take corrective action. That body is the National Assembly.
Recognising that the amendment is a probing amendment, I hope that the hon. Member for Leominster (Mr. Wiggin) is reassured. We have listened to the comments made during pre-legislative scrutiny. We have removed the all-embracing power to exercise in any function and in any direction. We have made the provisions more specific in relation to the matters that I articulated. I hope that for those reasons the hon. Gentleman will feel able to withdraw his amendment.
Mr. Wiggin: I would most like to withdraw the amendment. It is unfortunate, however, that the Minister has not yet managed to convince me that everything that he said is different from paragraph 9. That is the sticking point. Under paragraph 9,
''The Centre must comply with any direction given by the Assembly under this Schedule.''
That means that paragraphs 6 and 7 are redundant. I do not understand why such negative provisions are necessary. However, I will happily listen to the Minister again, if he will help me on that point.
Mr. Touhig: If I may help the hon. Gentleman, paragraph 9 relates to the directions as concerns paragraphs 6 and 7, which are specific to any failure by Assembly in the functions that I have illustrated.
Mr. Wiggin: I am grateful, and I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Schedule 2 agreed to.
Clause 3
Functions of the Centre
Chris Grayling: I beg to move amendment No. 3, in
I view the amendment and the principles in it as perhaps the most important for the Bill. It seeks to enshrine in the Bill a duty of co-operation across borders in the United Kingdom. It is designed to be commonsensical and constructive, and in no way to remove rights and powers from the Wales Centre for Health, but to ensure that it works in partnership, for the good of the United Kingdom, rather than in isolation from the United Kingdom. I say that with genuine passion because, despite all the processes of devolution that have taken place, we are one nation. In all parts of our country, we share issues, in particular health issues. I simply do not believe that there is one single health issue that applies to Wales alone; certainly not the issues that, one could argue, have a significant impact in the Welsh community.
Column Number: 063
The hon. Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Mr. Smith) intervened on me on Second Reading to refer to his proper concerns about deep vein thrombosis and about the experience of that unfortunate condition in Wales. As I pointed out to him, however, it is not an exclusively Welsh issue. Wales is undoubtedly affected by other issues. Former coalminers face problems after many years in the pits, but so do former coalminers in other parts of the country. The young generation faces health and well-being issues, but those, too, are shared by other parts of the country.
We do not have a Welsh health service or an English health service; we have a national health service, as is right and proper. It is right that we make the best use of the resources available to us as a nation and that we do not commit resources unnecessarily to duplicating effort. At the same time, we must recognise that the localisation of health education and of some aspects of research may meet some local community needs.
It is fundamentally important that the Bill enshrines a spirit of co-operation, without detracting from the Welshness of certain services. As I told the hon. Member for Monmouth in the previous debate, health issues cross boundaries.
Hywel Williams: Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the condition that affects slate workers and ex-slate workers in my constituency? It is probably unique to north Wales, as is the fact that the employers went bankrupt. In 1979, that led to the passing of legislation that applied only to those slate workers and nowhere else in the UK, as far as I know. I do not see how there could be co-operation, as the hon. Gentleman called it, with parts of the UK where a condition does not exist and where employers have not gone out of business.
Chris Grayling: If there is an individual case, I stand to be corrected. I should remind the hon. Gentleman, however, that there has been an established slate mining industry in other parts of the country; most notably in the peak district. It would surprise me, therefore, if his constituents' experience was limited wholly and exclusively to his part of Wales. It may have suffered more than any other part of the UK, and different areas will always be affected differently. However, I should be astonished if any complaint was wholly and exclusively limited to Wales, even though some complaints are more significant there. I fully accept the hon. Gentleman's point about his constituency experience, but when he hears the full details of my argument, he will see that that one case does not prove that I am wrong.
Health services cross borders. I mentioned that the Association of Welsh Community Health Councils had embarked on a project to assess the level of service provided by English health organisations to Welsh patients in the cross-border region. In the areas around Chester and, indeed, right the way up the border, there will inevitably be crossovers involving people who live in Wales and the English health service, as well as people who live in England and the Welsh health service. Several years ago, a significant issue arose right on the border, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Leominster, where a
Column Number: 064
hospital closure had undoubted implications for both communities.
Mr. Jones: I have just thought of a crossover problem, and the hon. Gentleman might like to think about whether the amendment would deal it. If, as reported, the Welsh Assembly does not enact the Bill's provisions on bed blocking, but they are enacted in England, English hospitals will presumably be entitled to charge Welsh local authorities for bed blocking, while Welsh hospitals will not be able to charge English local authorities. Would the amendment sort that interesting problem out?
Chris Grayling: The hon. Gentleman makes an interesting point, although I do not think that my amendment would solve the specific issue. None the less, it is a good point. As funding regimes differ between local authorities, and, potentially, between England and Wales, the whole issue of placements for the elderly in care homes will open up a Pandora's box of problems for the care home sector and for local authorities, such as placing people across the border for financial reasons.
Mr. Evans: Perhaps the Wales Centre for Health will look into that, to work out what will happen to elderly people in certain areas who are bed blocking. The hon. Member for Cardiff, Central (Mr. Jones) raises an interesting point. If fines are introduced in England but not in Wales, bed blocking may be eradicated in England but not in Wales. That should interest both the Wales Centre for Health and community health councils.
| 
