NHS reforms approved by Parliament

Health workers demonstrate outside the Houses of Parliament against the Health and Social Care Bill Health workers demonstrate outside the Houses of Parliament against the Health and Social Care Bill

The passage of the coalition's controversial NHS reforms would prove to be a "cause of significant regret", according to the Royal College of Nursing (RCN).

The bitter 14-month parliamentary battle finally came to an end on Tuesday after the Government comfortably fended off a desperate attempt by Labour to delay the legislation.

MPs then approved the last amendments to the Health and Social Care Bill - leaving the way clear for Royal Assent to be granted before Parliament starts its Easter recess next week.

The NHS shake-up has threatened to drive a wedge between the coalition partners ever since it was unveiled by Tory Health Secretary Andrew Lansley. It is intended to give GPs greater control over NHS budgets, reduce bureaucracy, and increase patient choice.

But while there was jubilation among Tory and Liberal Democrat ministers, opponents have warned that the problems are only just beginning. RCN chief executive and general secretary Dr Peter Carter described the reforms as "deeply flawed".

He said: "We have achieved some concessions which make the Bill a different piece of legislation from that which first appeared, but our real concerns about the future of the NHS have not been heeded.

"It is now our responsibility to patients to do everything we can to ensure that the health service runs as best as it can despite the massive upheaval that this Bill will bring."

Despite accepting more than a thousand amendments - including limits on competition and private sector involvement - the Government has failed to win over many health workers. And there is speculation that the controversy could yet cost Mr Lansley his job in a reshuffle expected over the coming months.

An emergency debate called by Labour had the potential to delay the Bill until an internal assessment of risks had been published. Shadow health secretary Andy Burnham demanded that the Government publish the risk register, insisting: "People outside will struggle to understand how Members of this House could make such momentous decisions without having carefully considered all of the facts and all of the evidence."

But Mr Lansley accused Labour of "political opportunism", saying civil servants needed "safe space" in which to advise ministers. The Commons defeated the motion by 328 to 246 - a majority of 82. No Lib Dem MPs sided with the opposition, with the most vocal critics choosing to abstain.

Comments(2)

*Flick* says...
10:00am Wed 21 Mar 12

The coallition are running this country into the ground :(
But one thing is for sure, neither Torys nor LibDem will get in at the next general election!!

paultheuver1 says...
6:21pm Wed 21 Mar 12

As a Maldonian born and bred, I hope but sincerely doubt the local electorate will consider at the next election, how the incumbent MP for Maldon, Mr John Whittingdale, voted to push the Health and Social Care Bill through Parliament, without MP's and the Lords having access to the Transition Risk Register, even though the Information Commissioner has ordered the Government to release it.
MP's had the chance to wait a fraction of the Bills time in Parliament, for the tribunal to rule on the governments appeal against releasing the Transition Risk Register, but decided they didn't need all the facts to make an informed decision and voted to rush on with it's introduction.
The Government maintain that the Register contains sensitive information but the Transition Risk Register is not the full Risk Register, but focuses on risks specifically associated with the reorganisation and not the full document the government infer.
The blind adherence to the Party line shown by John Whittingdale and other MP's in the district shows the complete disregard they have for their constituents. Surely, you would think that any caring Member of Parliament would want to have all the facts to hand before they endorsed a radical change to the NHS. But why would they when they have the blind support of an electorate that doesn't care to educate itself.
It's time for everyone to realise that their vote really does count. If you can't be bothered to vote or are happy to vote the way your personal media steers you, you can't really complain when your local representative fails to represent you. By abstaining on the vote to delay, many Liberal Democrat MP's illustrate my point and they will have to answer to their constituents for their inaction. Of course, you can't please all the people, all of the time. But being aware and informed means you are more likely to get the MP you want, it should also make your MP up his/her game as they become aware they are no longer dealing with the blissfully ignorant.
The NHS is a National Institution, which deserves much more than just Party politics. The vast majority in this country rely on the NHS and cannot chose the alternative, so any negative changes to it will effect the majority, because it's their only option.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree