§ Mr. Paul Burstow (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)I beg to move amendment No. 1, in page 5, line 6, at end insert—
'(2A) To facilitate co-operation the Agency shall consult with other bodies and publish protocols for co-operation.'.I want to speak briefly to this amendment, which concerns an issue that we explored in some detail in Committee. The amendment relates to clause 5, which deals with co-operation between organisations, including the Health Protection Agency, not only to enable that agency to deliver its functions but, in other circumstances, to enable other bodies to discharge some of theirs. There is a mutual duty to co-operate.62 One of my concerns, which arose partly from a speech made on Second Reading by the hon. Member for North-West Leicestershire (David Taylor), and also from other hon. Members' speeches, is that the clause's drafting leaves open quite a few questions about how the duty to co-operate will be realised in practice. I tabled an amendment in Committee that was intended to include in the Bill permission for the HPA to draw up and consult on protocols on discharging the duty of co-operation with other agencies. In exchanges in Committee, the Minister resisted the amendment, because, in her words, it was both burdensome and prescriptive. It was far from my intention to create a burdensome and prescriptive measure. I sought assurance after the Committee consideration of the amendment about whether the wording could be construed as prescriptive or whether it could be more appropriately construed as permissive. I am advised—and have therefore re-tabled it for consideration today—that its character is more permissive than prescriptive.
The intention of the amendment is simply to introduce a mechanism into the Bill that provides for the Health Protection Agency, when it must work with other bodies in order to discharge its functions, to consult on and draw up protocols. It is permissive, because reference is made to the body having the power to do that. I commend the amendment to the scrutiny of hon. Members.
In Committee, we had a useful contribution from the hon. Member for Newark (Patrick Mercer), who raised a number of concerns about the need for such protocols, not least to deal with arrangements between the Health Protection Agency and other bodies, such as local authorities, in the event of radiological, biological or chemical attacks. On Second Reading, the hon. Member for North-West Leicestershire expressed concern about the lack of co-operation at times between the Environment Agency and other bodies, particularly the Health Protection Agency.
In Committee, I raised the issue of who took responsibility, and where the buck stopped, in the handling of outbreaks—particularly outbreaks that might involve zoonosis, or potential transfer from animals to humans. The Minister asserted several times that a protocol specifying who might, in certain circumstances, make the decision would be inappropriate and that it would be appropriate for that to be dealt with solely through co-operation. That, surely, is a recipe for chaos. Protocols can clarify such questions as whether a Minister or an agency will make the decision.
The amendment is intended to improve the Bill and to provide, on a permissive rather than a prescriptive basis, a mechanism enabling the HPA, with partner agencies, to draw up suitable fit-for-purpose protocols at the least possible cost to the taxpayer and with the greatest possible benefit in terms of effective service with co-operation being the key.
§ Dr. Andrew Murrison (Westbury) (Con)I support this sensible amendment. My hon. Friend the Member for Newark (Patrick Mercer) went to some trouble in Committee to outline his views on co-operation, especially in emergencies. The hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Mr. Burstow) talked about that as well.
63 The amendment sets out, in a reasonably prescriptive way, the arrangements that might exist between the HPA and other bodies. As the Minister will recall, I pointed out in Committee that those bodies were not specified in the Bill. She gave me a reasonable explanation, but it is a burden for the bodies that are expected to co-operate with the agency not to know who they are. The Minister and I discussed that in some detail.
The amendment will probably help by describing the precise nature of the co-operation. That will be particularly beneficial when there is not enough time to make detailed decisions on any form of working arrangement. The work is being done before the emergency arises. I am sure that, if my hon. Friend the Member for Newark were present, he would strongly support a measure that would deal with some of the anxieties he expressed at length in Committee.
§ Miss Melanie JohnsonAs I explained in Committee, our 2002 consultation paper noted that the agency would need to co-operate with other bodies, and the responses supported that proposal. That is why clause 4 provides for the agency and other bodies exercising related functions to have a mutual duty of co-operation.
Although the thinking behind the amendment is clear, it is not clear how it would work in practice. Let me explain a few things. First, the principle of imposing a duty of co-operation is not new. The HPA already has a duty to co-operate with other NHS bodies and local authorities. Section 26 of the Health Act 1999 imposes a duty on NHS bodies to co-operate with each other and section 22 of the National Health Service Act 1977 creates a duty of co-operation between NHS bodies and local authorities. Secondly, "co-operation" means just that: it implies not wholesale rewriting of each other's priorities, but sensible working together to ensure that the public are served to best effect. Thirdly, it is normal and sensible to leave the details of how co-operation will work in practice to the parties concerned rather than prescribing them in primary legislation. Different levels and forms of working together will be appropriate in different circumstances and with different bodies.
§ I do not believe that anything will be gained by our writing into the Bill a requirement for the agency to publish protocols on co-operation with other bodies. Such a requirement has not been found necessary in other contexts. There is, for example, no requirement in legislation for NHS bodies and local authorities to produce protocols explaining how they will co-operate. In practice, the agency and some of the bodies with which it will co-operate might well want to produce protocols or other forms of agreement if they were regularly to involve each other in certain procedures, but there might be cases in which protocols would not be appropriate and would not be required. Judgments about operational matters are best left to the agency and its partners rather than being prescribed in legislation.
§
It is difficult to assess whether the amendment is meaningful. I realise that the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Mr. Burstow) has tried to resist the
64
temptation to prescribe in detail what co-operation should mean, but my first objection is that he is doing that. He has suggested a general requirement to produce and publish protocols on co-operation. He explained in Committee that the requirement
is not intended to be prescriptive. It is intended to indicate a mechanism, a natural part of which I would expect the HPA to be undertaking."—[Official Report, Standing Committee F, 29 June 2004: c. 25.]
The hon. Gentleman cannot have it both ways. His amendment is prescriptive: it dictates to the agency and its partners that they should have protocols. If, as he has argued, that is a natural part of what we would expect the HPA to undertake, there is no need to dictate to it and its partners that they should have such protocols.
§ If the amendment is not too prescriptive—although it certainly could be—it can equally be interpreted as being meaningless. In some circumstances in which it is reasonable in the circumstances, the agency could discharge a proposed duty simply by producing a protocol saying that there shall be co-operation in appropriate circumstances and by appropriate means. Nothing would be gained by such a meaningless requirement. As I said in Committee, a legal requirement to publish protocols would also ignore the fact that there could be good reasons against publication in some circumstances. For example, there might well be a need for the agency to co-operate with the security services, but it would not necessarily be desirable for the details of that co-operation to be put in the public domain.
§ The amendment is generally far too prescriptive. It undermines the hon. Gentleman's recognition in Committee that we do not wish to prescribe such matters. The hon. Member for Westbury (Dr. Murrison) described it as "reasonably prescriptive". I am not sure what that means, but I think that it is far too prescriptive, because it writes into primary legislation a requirement to publish protocols in co-operation with other bodies, which we do not need to do. The arrangements are already in place. I have already specified the precedents that show that this is unnecessary. We should give the bodies a certain amount of flexibility, because in certain circumstances prescription would be inappropriate.
§ I hope that the House will reject the amendment, because I do not think it would necessarily have the effect that the hon. Gentleman wants. Good cooperation and good work on protocols will continue. That, not prescription in primary legislation, is what will deliver.
§ Mr. BurstowI am grateful to the hon. Member for Westbury (Dr. Murrison) for his support and to the Minister for her response. The debate turns on what is read into the word "shall", and whether in this context it becomes "must". That, at least, is what the Minister seems to be trying to discuss with us.
I do not agree with the construction that the Minister places on those words. The amendment is about trying to find a fail-safe mechanism to be used when cooperation is not being secured in other ways—a mechanism that need not be used in all circumstances, but that shall be available. I am still not convinced that 65 clause 5 is sufficiently clear to ensure that all the bodies that could play a part in helping the HPA to discharge its functions are brought into its ambit. My amendment seeks to achieve that as simply as possible. I was not persuaded by the Minister's argument to withdraw it, and I shall press it to a vote.
§ Question put, That the amendment be made—
§ The House divided: Ayes 164, Noes 287.
68| Division No. 231] | [6:20 pm |
| AYES | |
| Ainsworth, Peter (E Surrey) | Garnier, Edward |
| Allan, Richard | Gidley, Sandra |
| Amess, David | Gillan, Mrs Cheryl |
| Ancram, rh Michael | Goodman, Paul |
| Arbuthnot, rh James | Gray, James (N Wilts) |
| Atkinson, David (Bour'mth E) | Grayling, Chris |
| Atkinson, Peter (Hexham) | Green, Damian (Ashford) |
| Bacon, Richard | Green, Matthew (Ludlow) |
| Baker, Norman | Greenway, John |
| Baldry, Tony | Grieve, Dominic |
| Barker, Gregory | Gummer, rh John |
| Baron, John (Billericay) | Hague, rh William |
| Barrett, John | Hammond, Philip |
| Beith, rh A. J. | Hancock, Mike |
| Bellingham, Henry | Heald, Oliver |
| Bercow, John | Heath, David |
| Beresford, Sir Paul | Heathcoat-Amory, rh David |
| Boswell, Tim | Hogg, rh Douglas |
| Bottomley, Peter (Worthing W) | Holmes, Paul |
| Bottomley, rh Virginia (SW | Horam, John (Orpington) |
| Surrey) | Jack, rh Michael |
| Brady, Graham | Jenkin, Bernard |
| Brazier, Julian | Jones, Nigel (Cheltenham) |
| Browning, Mrs Angela | Kennedy, rh Charles (Ross Skye & |
| Bruce, Malcolm | Inverness) |
| Burns, Simon | Key, Robert (Salisbury) |
| Burnside, David | Kirkbride, Miss Julie |
| Burstow, Paul | Lait, Mrs Jacqui |
| Burt, Alistair | Lansley, Andrew |
| Butterfill, Sir John | Lewis, Dr. Julian (New Forest E) |
| Cable, Dr. Vincent | Liddell-Grainger, Ian |
| Calton, Mrs Patsy | Lidington, David |
| Cameron, David | Lilley, rh Peter |
| Campbell, rh Sir Menzies (NE | Loughton, Tim |
| Fife) | Luff, Peter (M-Worcs) |
| Carmichael, Alistair | McIntosh, Miss Anne |
| Chapman, Sir Sydney (Chipping | Mackay, rh Andrew |
| Barnet) | Maclean, rh David |
| Chidgey, David | McLoughlin, Patrick |
| Clappison, James | Malins, Humfrey |
| Clarke, rh Kenneth (Rushcliffe) | Maples, John |
| Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey | Marsden, Paul (Shrewsbury & |
| Collins, Tim | Atcham) |
| Cormack, Sir Patrick | Mawhinney, rh Sir Brian |
| Cotter, Brian | Mercer, Patrick |
| Curry, rh David | Mitchell, Andrew (Sutton |
| Davey, Edward (Kingston) | Coldfield) |
| Davies, Quentin (Grantham & | Moss, Malcolm |
| Stamford) | Murrison, Dr. Andrew |
| Djanogly, Jonathan | Norman, Archie |
| Dodds, Nigel | O'Brien, Stephen (Eddisbury) |
| Dorrell, rh Stephen | Öpik, Lembit |
| Doughty, Sue | Osborne, George (Tatton) |
| Duncan, Alan (Rutland) | Ottaway, Richard |
| Ewing, Annabelle | Page, Richard |
| Fallon, Michael | Paterson, Owen |
| Field, Mark (Cities of London & | Pickles, Eric |
| Westminster) | Portillo, rh Michael |
| Flight, Howard | Price, Adam (E Carmarthen & |
| Forth, rh Eric | Dinefwr) |
| Foster, Don (Bath) | Prisk, Mark (Hertford) |
| Gale, Roger (N Thanet) | Randall, John |
| Redwood, rh John | Tapsell, Sir Peter |
| Rendel, David | Taylor, Ian (Esher) |
| Robathan, Andrew | Taylor, John (Solihull) |
| Robertson, Hugh (Faversham & | Taylor, Matthew (Truro) |
| M-Kent) | Taylor, Dr. Richard (Wyre F) |
| Robertson, Laurence (Tewk'b'ry) | Taylor, Sir Teddy |
| Roe, Dame Marion | Teather, Sarah |
| Rosindell, Andrew | Tredinnick, David |
| Ruffley, David | Turner, Andrew (Isle of Wight) |
| Sanders, Adrian | Tyler, Paul (N Cornwall) |
| Sayeed, Jonathan | Tyrie, Andrew |
| Selous, Andrew | Viggers, Peter |
| Shephard, rh Mrs Gillian | Walter, Robert |
| Shepherd, Richard | Waterson, Nigel |
| Simmonds, Mark | Webb, Steve (Northavon) |
| Simpson, Keith (M-Norfolk) | Whittingdale, John |
| Spelman, Mrs Caroline | Willetts, David |
| Spicer, Sir Michael | Williams, Roger (Brecon) |
| Spink, Bob (Castle Point) | Winterton, Ann (Congleton) |
| Spring, Richard | Winterton, Sir Nicholas |
| Stanley, rh Sir John | (Macclesfield) |
| Steen, Anthony | Wishart, Pete |
| Streeter, Gary | Yeo, Tim (S Suffolk) |
| Stunell, Andrew | Young, rh Sir George |
| Swayne, Desmond | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Swire, Hugo (E Devon) | Bob Russell and |
| Syms, Robert | Sir Robert Smith |
| NOES | |
| Abbott, Ms Diane | Clark, Paul (Gillingham) |
| Ainger, Nick | Clarke, rh Tom (Coatbridge & |
| Ainsworth, Bob (Cov'try NE) | Chryston) |
| Alexander, Douglas | Clelland, David |
| Allen, Graham | Clwyd, Ann (Cynon V) |
| Anderson, rh Donald (Swansea E) | Coaker, Vernon |
| Anderson, Janet (Rossendale & | Coffey, Ms Ann |
| Darwen) | Cohen, Harry |
| Armstrong, rh Ms Hilary | Cook, rh Robin (Livingston) |
| Atherton, Ms Candy | Corston, Jean |
| Austin, John | Cousins, Jim |
| Bailey, Adrian | Cox, Tom (Tooting) |
| Baird, Vera | Crausby, David |
| Barnes, Harry | Cruddas, Jon |
| Barron, rh Kevin | Cryer, John (Hornchurch) |
| Bayley, Hugh | Cummings, John |
| Begg, Miss Anne | Cunningham, Jim (Coventry S) |
| Bell, Sir Stuart | Cunningham, Tony (Workington) |
| Bennett, Andrew | Dalyell, Tam |
| Benton, Joe (Bootle) | Darling, rh Alistair |
| Berry, Roger | Davey, Valerie (Bristol W) |
| Best, Harold | David, Wayne |
| Betts, Clive | Davidson, Ian |
| Blackman, Liz | Davies, rh Denzil (Llanelli) |
| Blears, Ms Hazel | Davies, Geraint (Croydon C) |
| Borrow, David | Dean, Mrs Janet |
| Bradley, Peter (The Wrekin) | Dhanda, Parmjit |
| Brennan, Kevin | Dobbin, Jim (Heywood) |
| Brown, rh Nicholas (Newcastle E | Dobson, rh Frank |
| Wallsend) | Dowd, Jim (Lewisham W) |
| Brown, Russell (Dumfries) | Dunwoody, Mrs Gwyneth |
| Buck, Ms Karen | Eagle, Angela (Wallasey) |
| Burden, Richard | Eagle, Maria (L'pool Garston) |
| Burgon, Colin | Efford, Clive |
| Byers, rh Stephen | Ellman, Mrs Louise |
| Cairns, David | Etherington, Bill |
| Campbell, Alan (Tynemouth) | Field, rh Frank (Birkenhead) |
| Campbell, Ronnie (Blyth V) | Fisher, Mark |
| Caplin, Ivor | Fitzsimons, Mrs Lorna |
| Caton, Martin | Flynn, Paul (Newport W) |
| Cawsey, Ian (Brigg) | Follett, Barbara |
| Challen, Colin | Foster, Michael (Worcester) |
| Clapham, Michael | Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings |
| Clark, Mrs Helen (Peterborough) | & Rye) |
| Clark, Dr. Lynda (Edinburgh | Gapes, Mike (Ilford S) |
| Pentlands) | George, rh Bruce (Walsall S) |
| Gerrard, Neil | McCabe, Stephen |
| Gibson, Dr. Ian | McCafferty, Chris |
| Gilroy, Linda | McCartney, rh Ian |
| Goggins, Paul | McDonagh, Siobhain |
| Griffiths, Jane (Reading E) | MacDonald, Calum |
| Griffiths, Win (Bridgend) | McDonnell, John |
| Grogan, John | MacDougall, John |
| Hall, Mike (Weaver Vale) | McFall, rh John |
| Hall, Patrick (Bedford) | McGuire, Mrs Anne |
| Hamilton, David (Midlothian) | McIsaac, Shona |
| Hamilton, Fabian (Leeds NE) | McKechin, Ann |
| Hanson, David | McNamara, Kevin |
| Havard, Dai (Merthyr Tydfil & | McNulty, Tony |
| Rhymney) | MacShane, Denis |
| Healey, John | McWalter, Tony |
| Hendrick, Mark | McWilliam, John |
| Hepburn, Stephen | Mahmood, Khalid |
| Heppell, John | Mahon, Mrs Alice |
| Hesford, Stephen | Mandelson, rh Peter |
| Hewitt, rh Ms Patricia | Mann, John (Bassetlaw) |
| Heyes, David | Marris, Rob (Wolverh'ton SW) |
| Hill, Keith (Streatham) | Marsden, Gordon (Blackpool S) |
| Hinchliffe, David | Marshall-Andrews, Robert |
| Hoey, Kate (Vauxhall) | Martlew, Eric |
| Hope, Phil (Corby) | Meacher, rh Michael |
| Hopkins, Kelvin | Meale, Alan (Mansfield) |
| Howarth, rh Alan (Newport E) | Merron, Gillian |
| Howarth, George (Knowsley N & | Michael, rh Alun |
| Sefton E) | Miliband, David |
| Howells, Dr. Kim | Miller, Andrew |
| Hoyle, Lindsay | Moffatt, Laura |
| Hughes, Beverley (Stretford & | Mole, Chris |
| Urmston) | Morris, rh Estelle |
| Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N) | Mudie, George |
| Hutton, rh John | Mullin, Chris |
| Iddon, Dr. Brian | Munn, Ms Meg |
| Illsley, Eric | Murphy, Denis (Wansbeck) |
| Irranca-Davies, Huw | Murphy, Jim (Eastwood) |
| Jackson, Helen (Hillsborough) | Naysmith, Dr. Doug |
| Jamieson, David | O'Brien, Bill (Normanton) |
| Jenkins, Brian | O'Hara, Edward |
| Johnson, Alan (Hull W) | Olner, Bill |
| Johnson, Miss Melanie (Welwyn | O'Neill, Martin |
| Hatfield) | Organ, Diana |
| Jones, Helen (Warrington N) | Perham, Linda |
| Jones, Jon Owen (Cardiff C) | Picking, Anne |
| Jones, Kevan (N Durham) | Pickthall, Colin |
| Jones, Lynne (Selly Oak) | Pike, Peter (Burnley) |
| Jowell, rh Tessa | Plaskitt, James |
| Joyce, Eric (Falkirk W) | Pollard, Kerry |
| Keeble, Ms Sally | Pond, Chris (Gravesham) |
| Keen, Ann (Brentford) | Pope, Greg (Hyndburn) |
| Kemp, Fraser | Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lewisham |
| Kennedy, Jane (Wavertree) | E) |
| Khabra, Piara S. | Prentice, Gordon (Pendle) |
| Kidney, David | Prescott, rh John |
| Kilfoyle, Peter | Prosser, Gwyn |
| King, Andy (Rugby) | Purchase, Ken |
| Knight, Jim (S Dorset) | Purnell, James |
| Kumar, Dr. Ashok | Quin, rh Joyce |
| Ladyman, Dr. Stephen | Quinn, Lawrie |
| Lammy, David | Rammell, Bill |
| Laxton, Bob (Derby N) | Rapson, Syd (Portsmouth N) |
| Lazarowicz, Mark | Raynsford, rh Nick |
| Lepper, David | Reed, Andy (Loughborough) |
| Leslie, Christopher | Reid, rh Dr. John (Hamilton N & |
| Levitt, Tom (High Peak) | Bellshill) |
| Lewis, Ivan (Bury S) | Robertson, John (Glasgow |
| Lewis, Terry (Worsley) | Anniesland) |
| Linton, Martin | Robinson, Geoffrey (Coventry |
| Lloyd, Tony (Manchester C) | NW) |
| Love, Andrew | Roche, Mrs Barbara |
| Lucas, Ian (Wrexham) | Rooney, Terry |
| Luke, Iain (Dundee E) | Ross, Ernie (Dundee W) |
| Lyons, John (Strathkelvin) | Roy, Frank (Motherwell) |
| McAvoy, Thomas | Ruane, Chris |
| Ruddock, Joan | Taylor, rh Ann (Dewsbury) |
| Russell, Ms Christine (City of | Taylor, Dari (Stockton S) |
| Chester) | Taylor, David (NW Leics) |
| Ryan, Joan (Enfield N) | Thomas, Gareth (Harrow W) |
| Salter, Martin | Tipping, Paddy |
| Sarwar, Mohammad | Todd, Mark (S Derbyshire) |
| Savidge, Malcolm | Touhig, Don (Islwyn) |
| Sawford, Phil | Trickett, Jon |
| Sedgemore, Brian | Truswell, Paul |
| Sheerman, Barry | Turner, Dennis (Wolverh'ton SE) |
| Sheridan, Jim | Turner, Dr, Desmond (Brighton |
| Simpson, Alan (Nottingham S) | Kemptown) |
| Singh, Marsha | Twigg, Derek (Halton) |
| Skinner, Dennis | Twigg, Stephen (Enfield) |
| Smith, rh Andrew (Oxford E) | Vaz, Keith (Leicester E) |
| Smith, Angela (Basildon) | Vis, Dr. Rudi |
| Smith, rh Chris (Islington S & | Ward, Claire |
| Finsbury) | Wareing, Robert N. |
| Smith, Geraldine (Morecambe & | Watson, Tom (W Bromwich E) |
| Lunesdale) | Watts, David |
| Smith, Llew (Blaenau Gwent) | White, Brian |
| Soley, Clive | Whitehead, Dr. Alan |
| Spellar, rh John | Williams, Betty (Conwy) |
| Squire, Rachel | Winterton, Ms Rosie (Doncaster |
| Stewart, David (Inverness E & | C) |
| Lochaber) | Woodward, Shaun |
| Stewart, Ian (Eccles) | Worthington, Tony |
| Stoate, Dr. Howard | Wright, Anthony D. (Gt |
| Strang, rh Dr. Gavin | Yarmouth) |
| Straw, rh Jack | Wright, Tony (Cannock) |
| Stringer, Graham | |
| Stuart, Ms Gisela | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Sutcliffe, Gerry | Charlotte Atkins and |
| Jim Fitzpatrick |
§ Question accordingly negatived.
§ Order for Third Reading read.
6.33 pm§ Miss Melanie JohnsonI beg to move, That the Bill be read a Third time.
I thank hon. Members for their contribution to the scrutiny of this Bill. The debate has been wide-ranging and has given Opposition Members the opportunity, for which I am sure that they are profoundly grateful, to debate a whole range of different aspects of the Government's public health policy. That the Health Protection Agency is relevant to so many public health issues is testament to how important its work already is and will continue to be.
We have given the Bill a thorough examination during its legislative passage. Before today, the House had already spent some nine hours considering it: more than three and a half hours on Second Reading, and nearly five and a half in Committee. I appreciate that that might not seem like a long time compared with many other Bills, including most of the Bills that I have been involved with in my parliamentary career. None the less, generous time has been allowed for its consideration, given the degree of support from all parts of the House—I am happy to say—for its general principles and overall aims. Of course, it had already been considered for nine and a half hours in another place.
The Government have been responsive to the points raised in the House and in the other place and have amended the Bill accordingly. A total of 16 Government amendments, made in response to points raised in the Lords, were accepted. Some 33 other amendments were accepted in the other place, but the Bill was well 69 prepared and those amendments did not raise new issues or set out new policies that were unforeseen at the time of its introduction.
§ Dr. Murrison:One issue, the review of arm's-length bodies, was severely glossed over. As I recall, the Minister repeatedly assured the Committee that the Bill would not be affected by that review. The Minister was either incorrect or she pre-judged the review's outcome; which was it?
§ Miss JohnsonI do not understand why the hon. Gentleman draws that conclusion. I was neither of the things that he says, and I stick exactly to what I have said on the record previously about the relationship between the Bill, the HPA and the arm's-length body review.
Six of the amendments accepted in another place affected the schedules, but they are concerned merely with tidying up.
As a result of this work, we have got right the statutory basis for the HPA. It is doing an important job and it will need to continue to do so, in conjunction with the National Radiological Protection Board; indeed, I have set out the advantages of bringing those bodies together. I am sure that Members will wish the HPA well in its future work. I therefore commend the Bill to the House.
§ Dr. MurrisonGenerally speaking, we welcome the Bill. Our proceedings in Committee were conciliatory throughout and I hope that the Minister appreciated the constructive comments made by all members of the Committee.
I am a concerned about the review of arm's-length bodies. Clearly, that must affect the HPA; it would be extraordinary if it did not. Members raised education 70 with the Minister on several occasions in Committee, encouraging her to include a reference to it in the Bill. Of course, education is a salient part of the terms of reference of several of the bodies that are likely to be abolished as a result of this review, so it is surely desirable that the Bill reflect that fact, at least in part. I appreciate that its terms of reference are broad; indeed, I strongly suspect that they were drawn up that way to allow for incorporation of the functions of other bodies, if and when they are abolished.
My hon. Friends the Members for Newark (Patrick Mercer) and for Rayleigh (Mr. Francois) made some important points on civil contingencies on Second Reading. I discerned in Committee that the Minister has perhaps not thought through that issue as well as she has other aspects of the Bill. She will of course have observed Operation Horizon, a very important exercise that took place in Birmingham over the weekend. I wonder what part the HPA played in it, and how that role might have differed if the HPA had been a non-departmental public body. It would be useful if the Minister commented on that issue or wrote to me about it, because it cuts to the heart of the transferring of this strategic health authority to the status of a non-departmental public body.
We face a whole raft of public health challenges, and I have to say that I am more concerned about public health outcomes than structures. That said, I of course wish the new body well—
§ It being two hours after the commencement of proceedings, MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER put the Questions necessary to bring proceedings on the Bill to a conclusion, pursuant to Order [this day].
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.