It was long.
It started at 4.14pm and finished at 9.59pm; 5 hours and 45 minutes.
The government won.
By 321 votes to 235; a majority of 86.
Heroes
Andrew George, the only Lib Dem to vote against the government.
Villains
Most of the Lib Dems, who voted with the government, including Vince Cable, Nick Clegg and Menzies Campbell.
Notable Absences.
Charles Kennedy and Jo Swinson from the Lib Dems; all of the Scottish National Party; most of the other smaller nationals. Mark Durkan (Social Dem and Lab NI), Caroline Lucas (Green), Dr William McCrea (DUP) and Elfyn Llwyd (Plaid) all turned up and voted against the bill.
Labour were hoist by their own petard.
Mr Stephen Dorrell: (to John Healey)
“ Let me pose the question and I shall be delighted to give way. Which of the key themes does the right hon. Gentleman oppose? Is it the practice-based commissioning or the “any willing provider” model? Is it the introduction of private sector expertise into commissioning, which was first articulated in the world class commissioning programme, or is it the principle of the maximum tariff? Let me help him by quoting from the operating framework of 2009, to which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State referred. It states:
“After 2010/11, we shall move to a position where national tariffs represent the maximum price payable to a commissioner, as opposed to the mandated price for a particular activity.”
With which of those four key policies does the right hon. Gentleman disagree?”
Some Lib Dems had a reason for not voting with Labour.
Gordon Birtwistle:
“I am pleased that the reconfiguration board is now studying a decision that the previous Government made to close my local hospital’s children’s ward. The Secretary of State is due to rule on that shortly.
A prime example of the authoritarian nature of primary care trusts can be seen in my constituency. Without proper consultation, we have seen our accident and emergency department closed and our children’s ward transferred to Blackburn. My constituency is seriously deprived, and the decisions made by managers in Manchester have had a disastrous effect on the health and well-being of thousands of my constituents, many being seriously ill children. The proposals before us will ensure that, for the first time, commissioners and all providers of NHS-funded services have to consult the local authority on the proposed substantial reconfiguration of designated services. In my eyes, that can only be a good thing..
Helen Jones (Warrington North) (Lab): The Bill allows private providers to undercut the NHS. What would the hon. Gentleman’s reaction be if an NHS service in his constituency disappeared because it had been undercut by a private provider?
Gordon Birtwistle: The service was removed by the hon. Lady’s Government, so I do not need to worry too much about private services.”
The ‘ Was I mistaken, or is care of the elderly going to be cut adrift from both the NHS and Social Services’ Moment?
Stephen Lloyd (Eastbourne) (LD): I agree that the issue of ageing patients is a fundamental challenge. Does my hon. Friend agree that domiciliary care, which is currently delivered through local authorities and primary care trusts, is a vital service that maintains many people’s health for the longer term and often prevents unnecessary stays in hospital? Does he agree that appropriate steps should be taken by the Government in the Bill to ensure access to high-quality domiciliary care for all?
Dr Poulter: My hon. Friend represents Eastbourne, which has a large elderly population. He is right to make that point. Under the Bill, health and wellbeing boards will be set up, which will deliver a proper partnership between GPs, hospitals and local councils. That will allow, for the first time, properly joined-up thinking about how we deliver social services care that is joined up with NHS care for older people. I am delighted that the Government will put in almost £1 billion to support that initiative, which can only be a good thing.
Last Word
Rosie Cooper (West Lancashire) (Lab):
I fear that today marks a watershed in the future of the NHS, and I say that as one who has proudly dedicated 30 years of my life to the service. Today is the day that the... Government will lead us down a path that, sadly, will end with a broken NHS.
The Hansard text of the debate can be found here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
The way New Labour were heading was not very different from where the ConDems are going. That is what is worst about all of this. Although all the major parties realise that the electorate consider the NHS to be important they do not seem to be respecting the electorate's views. To pretend that they were, the previous government produced lots of faux surveys to try and tease out from the electorate the answers they wanted. Any replies saying that patients were happy with their care were hushed up while replies favouring 'plurality' such as patients wanting choice were highlighted. If you ask patients whether they want choice or no choice, what answer would you expect?
The current government is also highlighting how bad the NHS is. I see Mad Nad, presumably primed by the data trawlers in Central Office, highlighted the difference in deaths from heart disease in France when this is well known to be a weird paradox - and probably not much to do with the realive performance of the health services in France and England.
The day that the Government led us down a path that, sadly, will end with a broken NHS has been planned for a very long time by a ruling class that has very little regard for the views of the common man. That's why the Labour criticisms have such a hollow ring.
Say not the struggle naught availeth, Dr G; the bill still has a way to go.
Dear Julia,
Stephen Dorrell's question was particularly pertinent, and unansweable by the Labour party.
The Bill applies only to England, so I can see why a lot of Scottish MPs did not attend the debate. It would be hypocritical to do so, and make stronger calls for "English votes on English Laws". There is a Conservative working majority in England.
Dr Phil
We had quite a debate on the West Lothian question with regard to this, Dr P. Those against voting took the view that it was an English matter and couldn't interfere and for most issues that's my view. But in this case I think there's grounds for voting because this bill is going to affect Scotland in terms of training and national terms and conditions. If matters play out for 'uneconomic' patients down south, we could also be seeing an exodus of elderly and sick coming to Scotland seeking the treatment they can't get under a new franchised NHS. So I'm in favour of a pre-emptive strike as it were. I also don't want to see the English NHS go down the pan without a fight.
Post a Comment