Clause 30
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill
7:30 pm
Maria Eagle (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Ministry of Justice; Liverpool, Garston, Labour)
That is effectively what will happen. There are already grey areas, and prisoners who might be better dealt with by the health service ombudsman might talk first to the current prison and probation ombudsman. Part 4 deals with having joint reports where that is sensible. We expect not to have hard and fast boundaries in the sense that someone will be sent away and have to start again; there will be sensible co-operation between the parliamentary commissioner, health service commissioner and the new commissioner. We are not trying to create or facilitate jurisdictional disputes, but seeking to make it easy to avoid them. Amending the Bill, rather than using an order under clause 30(4), as we had originally intended, will provide greater clarity regarding the new commissioner’s complaints remit. That must be sensible.
Amendment No. 287 will allow for the possibility of defining more clearly over time, and with experience, which matters of health care provision will be included in the new commissioner’s complaints remit. Some matters that are related to the provision of health care might go beyond the commissioner’s complaints remit. Such matters are not easily distinguishable and require negotiation between the new commissioner, the health service commissioner and other ombudsmen. I am sure that, in time, as they settle in with the new arrangements and the work that they do between them, it will become clear what sort of complaint should be dealt with by which process. There is no interest in us facilitating dispute or duplication at the boundaries between the ombudsmen’s remits, and we hope that the amendments make it clear where the boundaries should lie. Later provisions in part 4 deal with sensible arrangements for joint reporting and so on.