Mr John Denham (Minister of State, Department of Health; Southampton, Itchen, Labour)

I beg to move amendment No. 209, in page 32, line 29, leave out 'piloted' and insert 'local pharmaceutical'.

Mr David Madel (South West Bedfordshire, Conservative)

With this it will be convenient to take Government amendments Nos. 210, 211 and 223.

Mr John Denham (Minister of State, Department of Health; Southampton, Itchen, Labour)

The clause has a simple policy intention—that there should be no difference whatever between existing services and LPS pilot schemes in terms of prescription charges. The consequences should be the same for a patient who pays the prescription charge, or who makes a declaration to say that they do not need to do so, in all pharmacies, whether or not they are LPS pilots. Equally, the consequences should be the same for not paying a charge, which is why the clause provides the power to make regulations to apply penalty charges when exemption from payment is wrongly claimed. In serious cases, prosecution will be possible under section 122C of the Health Act 1997.

Government amendments Nos. 209 to 211 ensure that the status quo on prescription charges is maintained. The amendments alter subsections (1), (2) and (3) to make sure that the powers apply only to pharmaceutical services. The original drafting would have given schemes the power to charge for all services provided under pilot schemes, which was not our intention. By adding a further paragraph to schedule 3, Government amendment No. 223 provides the same regulation-making powers for substantive LPS schemes once they are introduced.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendments made: No. 210, in page 32, line 35, leave out `piloted' and insert `local pharmaceutical'.

No. 211, in page 23, line 38, leave out `piloted' and insert `local pharmaceutical'.—[Mr. Denham.]

Clause 36, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 37 ordered to stand part of the Bill.