§ Lord Clement-Jonesasked Her Majesty's Government:
In light of the recent Department of Health guidance on specialised commissioning, whether collaborative commissioning groups are intended to 66WA be a direct replacement for regional specialised commissioning groups; and [HL3113]
Whether regional specialised commissioning groups will continue, either in their current or in a modified form; and [HL3114]
What might constitute "good reasons for change" to existing commissioning consortia. [HL3117]
§ Baroness AndrewsThe recent guidance requires the development of Level 2 collaborative commissioning groups for specialised services. These will often cover the same geographical area as, and have similar functions to, the former regional specialised commissioning groups (RSCGs). However, collaborative commissioning groups' exact remit, powers and rules of engagement will be decided by their member primary care trusts (PCTs), as will the Level 1 collaborative commissioning groups for specialised services. It is therefore open to member PCTs to decide that these groups act as a direct replacement for RSCGs, but it is a matter for local decision. What might constitute good reasons for change to existing commissioning arrangements is a matter for local determination.
§ Lord Clement-Jonesasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether the decisions of collaborative commissioning groups will be binding on all primary care trust members. [HL3152]
§ Baroness AndrewsThe remit, powers and rules of engagement of collaborative commissioning groups for specialised services are agreed by the member primary care trusts (PCTs) and the decisions of these groups are binding on all members. Strategic health authorities performance manage such arrangements and ensure all PCTs belong to an appropriate collaborative commissioning group.