Clause 52 - National reviews
Health and Social Care(Community Health and Standards) Bill
3:30 pm
Mr Paul Burstow (Sutton and Cheam, Liberal Democrat)
The Under-Secretary's comments about the relationship between the Comptroller and Auditor General and the commission are useful, but the concern I still have is that when the Under-Secretary referred to section 33(5) of the Audit Commission Act 1998, he did not go on to refer to the fact that subsection (6) of that section specifically stipulates that the Audit Commission, in undertaking studies as to the economy, efficiency and effectiveness of health bodies has to consult with the Comptroller and Auditor General. In other words, it has prior knowledge of the fact that such studies are being undertaken.
The way in which the Bill is framed does not provide for similar consultation. The Comptroller does not have prior knowledge that a study is taking place. It is perfectly reasonable for the Under-Secretary to advance the idea that in a reasonable world reports will go to the Auditor General as a matter of course, so we do not need to specify that in the Bill. However, the question he did not answer was why parliamentary counsel, in conceiving the 1998 Act, thought it necessary to stipulate that such reports should go to the Auditor General. That seems to be an important clarification; I hope that the Under-Secretary will discuss that with his officials so we can be clear about what has changed between the passing of the 1998 Act and now.
Although I think that the amendments are important, I shall give the Under-Secretary the opportunity to consult on them further so that we may return to them at a later stage. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment made: No. 439, in
clause 52, page 18, line 33, leave out subsection (4).—[Mr. Lammy.]
Clause 52, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.