HL Deb 22 November 1976 vol 377 cc1694-5

3 Clause 2, page 2, line 43, at end insert— (3) Nothing shall be done under or by virtue of this Act, and nothing in this Act shall be construed, so as to operate to the detriment of any person (whether or not a consultant), who was on 12th April 1976 employed whole-time or part-time in one or other of the national health services or concerned with the interests of patients at NHS hospitals, whether or not such detriment occurs under, by reason or in consequence of the terms of his employment.

The Commons disagreed to this Amendment for the following Reason:

4 Because provision against detriment is unnecessary.

1.2 p.m.

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, I beg to move that the House doth not insist on their Amendment No. 3, to which the Commons have disagreed for the Reason numbered 4. Your Lordships will remember that the effect of this Amendment required nothing to be done under the Act that would cause detriment to National Health Service employees. This Amendment is drafted in rather broad terms and acceptance would put the Secretary of State at risk of being challenged in the court in attempting to implement the Act. I mentioned this when this matter was before your Lordships. There is little danger, in our view, that any employee will suffer serious detriment as a result of the pay bed phasing out authorisations. Maximum part-time consultants will be entitled to exercise their option to convert to whole-time contracts and it is highly unlikely that any National Health Service staff will lose their jobs, although I should be the first to admit that that cannot be guaranteed. The Commons have taken the view that they cannot accept your Lordships' Amendment because provision against detriment is. in their view, unnecessary.

Moved, That this House doth not insist on the said Amendment, to which the Commons have disagreed for the Reason numbered 4.—(Lord Wells-Pestell.)

Baroness YOUNG

My Lords, we find it deeply disappointing that the Government feel unable to accept this Amendment. My colleagues and I think it very unlikely that there will be no one who is employed in the National Health Service or who is a consultant who will suffer. Therefore, not to make any kind provision for this in the Bill is disturbing and could have very serious consequences for a number of individuals. However, we shall not insist on our Amendment.