Clause 79
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill
3:30 pm
Phil Woolas (Minister of State (Local Government & Community Cohesion), Department for Communities and Local Government; Oldham East and Saddleworth, Labour)
That is what we are trying to do—it is the central point. We do not want to involve specialist care units for babies who are seriously ill, but we do want to involve the hospital in matters relevant to the local area.
Amendment No. 65 would add the Mayor of London and Transport for London to the list of partner authorities. The Greater London authority is of course already represented in the list by three of its functional bodies—the Metropolitan Police, the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority and the London Development Agency. I intend to add a fourth, Transport for London, by amendment following consultations and representations. It is more appropriate to name the GLA’s delivery bodies than the Mayor himself, because they can agree and deliver local area agreement targets, a function that the Mayor does not have. I hope that hon. Members will accept that the Mayor and his office are subject to an accountability structure through the London assembly, as we have heard.
Similarly, there is an argument against parishes and community councils being added to the list. It would make the list of partners to be brought around a table very long. To give one example, North Yorkshire has 588 parish councils and the constituency of Bassetlaw has 88. That is a pragmatic point, although we will be signalling in the guidance the importance of involving parishes. Parish plans, which are important in the delivery of services to local areas, will of course be linked to local authorities’ community strategies. There are therefore two arguments on parishes: one pragmatic and the other asking to whom they are accountable. Ultimately one cannot supplant their accountability to the electorate with targets, even if they were agreed on.
Amendment No. 88 would add to the list of partner authorities any individuals or bodies that provide general medical services. It is not entirely certain and would be difficult to define in law what effects the wording would have, but it appears that it would include general practitioners. It might also include those providing medical services in acute trusts. To include such a broad group would make the process unworkable. It makes more sense to focus on primary care trusts, which commission both primary services and the hospital-based NHS.