§ 8.20 p.m.
§ Lord Walton of DetchantMy Lords, I beg to move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee. —(Lord Walton of Detchant.) On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly.
[The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (Lord Skelmersdale) in the Chair.]
§ Clause 1 [Constitution and functions of the general Osteopathic Council and its Committees]:
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 1:
Page 1, line 11, after first ("the") insert ("General").
§ The noble Lord said: In moving Amendment No. 1, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 7, 8, 10, 15, 24 to 28 and 30 to 31. These are all minor technical and drafting amendments to the Bill. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 2 agreed to.
§ Clause 3 [Information to be given by institutions granting qualifications in osteopathy]:
1404
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 2:
Page 2, line 2, after ("study") insert ("in osteopathy").
§ The noble Lord said: In moving Amendment No. 2, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 6, 16 and 32.
§ These are all minor amendments to the Bill. Amendment No. 2 to Clause 3 clarifies that only those educational institutions providing courses of study in osteopathy will be required to let the general council have information on the courses and examinations they conduct.
§ Amendment No. 6 to Clause 5 requires the general council to consult its education committee on whether a course of study will meet the required standards for the safe and competent practice of osteopathy.
§ Amendment No. 16 to Clause 7 ensures that in order to exercise his entitlement to be registered under the Act with full registration, an osteopath would first have to make an application for full registration, in the due form, to the registrar.
§ Amendment No. 32 to Clause 8 makes clear that the general council's rules on procedures on appeal will not cover proceedings in a court of law. I beg to move.
§ Clause 3, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 4 [Powers to appoint visitors]:
§
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Hooper) moved Amendment No. 3:
Page 2, line 14, leave out subsection (2).
§ The noble Baroness said: In moving Amendment No. 3 I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 4,5, 9 and 11 to 14.
§ The Government believe that the Privy Council's involvement should be less than that envisaged in the Bill. These amendments would provide in Clause 4 for the education committee to decide the nature of the visits and to receive the visitors' reports. The amendments to Clause 5 would remove the requirements for the Privy Council, first, to recognise the standards of proficiency recommended by the general council for the safe and competent practice of osteopathy; secondly, to recognise or, if appropriate, withdraw recognition from a qualification as providing an acceptable basis for registration; and, thirdly, to make orders to give effect to such decisions.
§ As a result, all these responsibilities, with the exception of making orders, would fall to the general council to decide after appropriate consultation with its education committee.
§ It is our intention that decisions taken by the general council under this section would require the consent of the Privy Council before they could take effect and, in the case of withdrawing recognition from a qualification, only after the Privy Council has considered any representation or objections from the educational institutions concerned.
§ I can assure the Committee that these amendments would in no way diminish our view of the importance of ensuring that osteopaths should be trained to, and practise at, the very highest standards. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Baroness Hooper moved Amendment No. 4:
1405
Page 2, line 30, leave out subsection (5).
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 4, as amended, agreed to. Clause 5 [Recognition of standards and qualifications]:
§
Baroness Hooper moved Amendment No. 5:
Page 2, line 38, leave out from ("osteopathy") to end of line 40.
§ The noble Baroness said: This amendment has been spoken to. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 6:
Page 2, line 41, after ("Council") insert ("after consultation with the Education Committee").
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No.7:
Page 2, line 44, leave out ("granting any") and insert ("acquiring a").
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 8:
Page 2, line 44, at end insert ("from that institution").
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Baroness Hooper moved Amendment No. 9:
Page2,line46,leaveoutfrom("may")to second ("qualification"), in line 47, and insert ("recognise that").
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 10:
Page 3, line 4, leave out ("granting any") and insert ("acquiring a").
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Baroness Hooper moved Amendments Nos. 11 to 14:
§ Page 3, line 7, leave out ("represent to the Privy Council that it is expedient") and insert ("direct").
§ Page 3, line 8, leave out ("should") and insert ("shall").
§
Page 3, line 9, leave out subsections (4) and (5) and insert:
("(4) No recognition or direction shall be given under this section without the consent of the Privy Council.
§ (5) Before giving, or refusing to give, their consent the Privy Council shall consider—
- (a)any report made under section 4 which relates to the course, examinations or institution in question and any observations on or objections to any such report which have been duly made under subsection (4) of that section, and
- (b)in the case of a proposed direction, any representations or objections made to them by the educational institution in question.").
§ Page 3, line 31, leave out ("specified in an Order made") and insert ("recognised").
§ The noble Baroness said: With the leave of the Committee I shall move Amendments Nos. 11 to 14 en bloc. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendments agreed to.
§ Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 6 [Keeping and publication of register of osteopaths]:
1406§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 15:
§
Page 4, line 3, leave out from ("sale") to end of line 6 and insert:
("(6) Where the General Council consider it appropriate, they may discharge their duty under subsection (5) by printing, publishing and making available for sale one or more supplements to the last published copy of the register.
§ (7) Any document published under subsection (5) or (6) shall be admissible as evidence of the contents of the register (except as respects any honours or distinctions accorded to a registered person).").
§ The noble Lord said: I beg to move.
§ Lord DesaiThat leaves "available for". It ends half way. Is there not one more word to be left out? That is the way I read it after the omission.
§ Lord Walton of DetchantI accept that.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 7 [Entitlement to registration]:
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 16:
Page 4, line 8, after ("if") insert (",on an application for full registration duly made to the Registrar,").
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 17:
Page 4, line 12, after ("(ii)") insert ("in the case of an application for registration made before the end of the period of two years beginning with the day on which this section comes into force,").
§ The noble Lord said: In moving Amendment No. 17 I shall speak also to Amendment No. 20.
§ As the law currently stands anyone may call himself or herself an osteopath and practise as such in the United Kingdom. There is no obligation to undergo formal training of any kind. The patient therefore has no guarantee that people holding themselves out as practising osteopaths are competent or fit to do so. The purpose of this Bill is to give the public that assurance by making it a condition of registration that osteopaths are highly trained in their profession.
§ Yet we also recognise that there are osteopaths who, while not holding a formal qualification, have nonetheless safely and competently been practising osteopathy for many years. The Bill therefore provides two levels of registration for this group of practitioners: full registration to those who have safely and competently been practising osteopathy for a total of five out of the seven years preceding the opening of the register; and provisional registration for those who have been so practising for a total of four out of six years, subject to the condition that they will, within five years, complete any further training specified by the general council and pass any test of competence it may set.
§ It is our intention that registration under these criteria should be available for a transitional period only after which time an osteopath would be able to apply only for full registration on the basis that he holds a recognised qualification. As currently drafted, however, the Bill makes no provision for this transitional period. Following discussions with representatives of the profession we feel this should be 1407 a period of two years from the opening of the register which these amendments will introduce. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Baroness Hooper moved Amendment No. 18:
Page 4, line 15, at end insert ("and").
§ The noble Baroness said: In moving this amendment I speak also to Amendments Nos. 19, 23 and 29. Amendments Nos. 19 and 23 are substantive amendments which would remove the statutory requirement that as a condition to being registered under the Act the osteopath has adequate public liability insurance for claims against him for negligence in his practice. Amendments Nos. 18 and 29 are consequential drafting amendments. The Government do not believe that the Bill should interfere with the workings of a free market by imposing a statutory requirement for insurance cover.
§ We would however expect the profession to regulate itself in this area and will look to the general council to exercise its rule-making powers to satisfy itself that osteopaths would have appropriate insurance cover. The amendments make clear that the general council's powers are sufficient in this area for the protection of the public. These rules would be subject to approval by the Privy Council. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Baroness Hooper moved Amendment No. 19:
Page 4, line 16, leave out from ("character") to end of line 20.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 20:
Page 4, line 22, after ("if") insert (",on an application for provisional registration duly made to the Registrar before the end of the period of two years beginning with the day on which this section comes into force,").
§ The noble Lord said: In moving this amendment I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 21 and 22. The amendments also relate to the transitional arrangements. Amendments Nos. 21 and 22 are intended to provide a safety net for the student who, in good faith, had embarked on a course of study which he fully expected would lead to a recognised qualification but at some midway point ceased to be recognised by the general council as meeting the standards set for the safe and competent practice of osteopathy. As drafted, the Bill would permit a student in this position to apply for provisional registration and consequently to practise.
§ However, it is incongruous that a Bill which intends to establish a registration based on prescribed standards of training should make provision enabling a person to practise osteopathy on the basis that he had partially completed a training course which in its entirety would not, in the judgment of the general council, equip him with the skills required for safe and competent practice. We intend that the original spirit of this subsection will be retained by providing a system of credits towards a recognised qualification 1408 for a student caught in this position but separate from the conditions of entitlement to registration. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendments Nos. 21 and 22:
Page 4, line 24, leave out ("either").
Page 4, leave out lines 29 to 34 and insert ("and").
§ On Question, amendments agreed to.
§
Baroness Hooper moved Amendment No. 23:
Page 4, line 35, leave out from ("character") to end of line 39.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 24:
§ Page 4, line 42, leave out ("Act") and insert ("section").
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendments Nos.25 to 28:
§ Page 5, line 14, leave out ("Act") and insert ("section").
§ Page 5, line 18, leave out ("persons who have qualified as osteopaths") and insert ("any person who holds a qualification in osteopathy").
§ Page 5, line 21, leave out ("their qualifications are") and insert ("his qualification is").
§ Page 5, line 22, leave out ("the qualifications recognised under this Act") and insert ("a recognised qualification").
§ On Question, amendments agreed to.
§
Baroness Hooper moved Amendment No. 29:
Page 5, line 23, leave out from ("that") to end of line 24 and insert ("he is of good character").
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 7, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 8 [Rules with respect to registration]:
§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendments Nos. 30 and 31:
§ Page 5, line 41, leave out ("and the charging of fees in respect of those matters").
§
Page 5, line 45, at end insert:
("( ) the charging of fees and the consequences (which may include removal from the register) of failing to pay any required fee;").
§ The noble Lord said: I spoke to these minor technical drafting amendments at the outset. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendments agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 32:
Page 5, line 46, after ("procedure") insert (",otherwise than in relation to court proceedings,").
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 8, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 9 agreed to.
§ Clause 10 [Preliminary investigation of complaints against osteopaths]:
§
Baroness Hooper moved Amendment No. 33:
Page 6, line 10, after ("has") insert ("at any time").
§ The noble Baroness said: With permission, in moving this amendment I shall speak also to Amendment No. 34. Amendment No.34 would remove the powers of the investigating committee to 1409 instigate an investigation on the basis that an osteopath is alleged to have been convicted outside the United Kingdom of a criminal offence. Amendment No. 33 is a drafting amendment.
§ Generally speaking, convictions in foreign courts have no particular standing or significance in this country and they could not, for example, be taken into account by an English court in considering what sentence to impose after conviction of an offence committed here. Further, it may not be possible to confirm what decision a foreign court reached in a particular case and, given the difference between legal systems, it will often not be possible to say with certainty whether the same actions would have resulted in a criminal conviction if committed in this country. We therefore feel that on balance this provision should be withdrawn. That is the intention of the amendment. I should perhaps add that removing these provisions would in fact put the investigating committee on a par with other professional bodies; for example, the General Medical Council's preliminary proceedings committee. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Baroness Hooper moved Amendment No. 34:
Page 6, leave out lines 11 to 13.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 35:
Page 6, line 28, leave out ("in the case mentioned in subsection (1) (b)").
§ The noble Lord said: This amendment would require the investigating committee to provide the osteopath with details of the allegations made against him in all circumstances and not just, as the Bill currently provides, in cases of alleged unacceptable professional conduct. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 36:
Page 6, line 35, after ("Committee") insert ("or the Health Committee").
§ The noble Lord said: I will, with permission, move this amendment and speak to Amendments Nos. 37 to 39 and Amendment No. 41. Amendment No. 36 will bring the procedures to be followed in a referral to the health committee, by the investigating committee, in line with those to the professional conduct committee; namely, that the investigating committee must determine the specific terms of the complaint and inform the osteopath that it is being referred to the health committee. Amendments Nos. 37 to 39 are drafting amendments; Amendment No. 41 is consequential on Amendment No. 36. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendments Nos. 37 to 39:
§ Page 6, line 35, after ("they") insert: (a);").
§ Page 6, line 36, leave out ("terms of the complaint") and insert ("details of the allegation").
1410§ Page 6, line 37, leave out ("it") and insert ("those details").
§ On Question, amendments agreed to.
§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 40:
§
Page 6, line 37, at end insert ("and
(b) may, if they are satisfied that it is necessary to do so for the protection of members of the public, make an order suspending his registration pending determination of the reference.
§ (3A) No order shall be made under subsection (3) (b) unless the registered osteopath concerned has been given an opportunity to appear before the Investigating Committee to give his reasons why such an order should not be made.").
§ The noble Lord said: Notwithstanding the seriousness of the allegations, the Bill as drafted makes no provision for the investigating committee to take any action against an osteopath pending the outcome of referral to the health or professional conduct committees. This amendment however will enable the investigating committee to impose an immediate suspension where it is satisfied that such action is necessary for the protection of the public. A right to protest to the investigating committee against such action is provided. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 41:
Page 6, line 38, leave out subsection (4).
§ The noble Lord said: This amendment is consequential upon previous amendments which have been accepted. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 42:
Page 6, line 46, leave out subsection (6).
§ The noble Lord said: The investigating committee is not part of a system in which there are appellate procedures in place. The only rights of appeal under the Bill come from Clause 14 which does not bite on the investigating committee. Consequently, subsection 10(6) is unnecessary. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 10, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 11 [References to the Professional Conduct Committee]:
§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 43:
§
Page 7, line 8, leave out from ("(1)") to end of line 16 and insert:
("Where a case has beenreferredto the Professional Conduct Committee under section 10, they may, if satisfied that it falls within paragraph (a) or (b) of subsection (1) of that section, take one or more of the following steps—
(a) admonish the registered osteopath concerned;").
§ The noble Lord said: In moving this amendment I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 47, 48 and 65. Amendment No. 43 is a drafting amendment upon which Amendments Nos. 47 and 48, and Amendment No. 65 to Clause 14 are consequential. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Baroness Hooper moved Amendment No. 44:
Page 7, line 20, at end insert ("or").
§ The noble Baroness said: In moving Amendment No. 44 I shall speak also to Amendment No. 45. 1411 Amendment No. 45 will remove the powers to fine and impose costs from the list of sanctions the professional conduct committee could impose on an osteopath and for these amounts to be recovered as if they were a civil debt. In the most severe cases, the professional conduct committee would be able to prevent the osteopath from continuing in his profession. Amendment No. 44 is a consequential drafting amendment. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Baroness Hooper moved Amendment No. 45:
Page 7, line 22, leave out from second ("specified") to end of line 32.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 46:
§
Page 7, line 32, at end insert:
("(2A) Where the Professional Conduct Committee have made an order for suspension under subsection (1) (c), they may order—
but they shall not extend any period of suspension under this section for more than three years at a time.
§ (2B) Where the Professional Conduct Committee have made an order under subsection (1) (d) or (2A) (c) for conditional registration, they may—
- (a) order that the current period of conditional registration shall be extended for such further period from the time when it would otherwise expire as may be specified in the order; or
- (b) revoke the order or revoke or vary any of the conditions;
§ The noble Lord said: In moving this amendment I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 47 and 48 which are consequential. This amendment would enable the professional conduct committee to review a period of suspension and either renew it for a further period of up to three years, to erase the osteopath's name from the register or to impose conditions on his registration. Similarly, it would enable the committee, on reviewing a period of conditional registration, to renew the existing conditions for a further period of up to three years, or to revoke the order, or revoke or vary any of the conditions. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendments Nos. 47 and 48:
Page 8, line 3, leave out ("(2)") and insert ("(1)").
Page 8, line 8, leave out ("(2)") and insert ("(1)").
§ On Question, amendments agreed to.
§ Clause 11, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 12 [References to the Health Committee]:
1412
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 49.
Page 8, line 40, after ("of') insert ("members of).
§ The noble Lord said: In moving this amendment I shall speak also to Amendment No. 50. As currently drafted, the Bill would require the health committee, in deciding whether to suspend or to impose conditional registration on an osteopath who is unfit to practise, to consider which course of action would better secure the protection of the public and maintain public confidence in the profession. The words "protection of the public" imply, however, that before coming to its decision the health committee would have to weigh in the balance the threat of the osteopath's condition on the public at large, or possibly in a completely different part of the country. Similarly, in seeking to maintain public confidence in the profession the health committee would have to consider the impact of its decision on an unfit osteopath in, for example, Barnsley, and on public opinion in, say, Huddersfield. What is intended, however, and what these amendments will enable to happen, is that the health committee should base its decision on what is required for protection of those members of the public who would otherwise have been treated, or will continue to be treated, by the osteopath. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 50:
Page 8, line 40, leave out ("and the maintenance of public confidence in the profession").
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 51:
Page 8, line 43, leave out ("one year") and insert ("three years").
§ The noble Lord said: If the health committee decides that an osteopath is unfit to practise it would be able either to suspend or impose conditions on his registration. As currently drafted, the Bill would enable the health committee to impose an initial suspension for a maximum period of one year only. The experience of equivalent committees under similar regulatory schemes, such as the health committee of the General Medical Council, for example, is that when faced with a long-term physical or mental condition, a maximum period of one year is too short and often requires the individual in question to reappear before the committee at regular intervals. This amendment would enable the health committee to make an initial order suspending the osteopath's registration for a maximum period of up to three years. I should perhaps add that provision is made in the Bill which would enable such an order to be reviewed in the osteopath's favour if it were subsequently considered to bo too onerous. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 52:
Page 8, line 47, leave out ("if any").
§ The noble Lord said: In moving this amendment I shall speak also to Amendment No. 53. As currently drafted the Bill permits the health committee to take no action against an osteopath it has considered by reason of his physical or mental condition to be unfit to perform his professional functions. This clearly runs contrary to the intention and the inherent responsibilities incumbent on the health committee in safeguarding members of the public. Amendment No. 53 seeks, therefore, to remove this option thereby requiring the health committee either to suspend or to impose conditions on the registration of an osteopath who is unfit to practise. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 53:
Page 8, line 48, leave out from ("(c)") to ("subject") in line 2 on page 9.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 54:
Page 9, line 7, at end insert ("and").
§ The noble Lord said: In moving this amendment I shall, with the leave of the Committee, speak also to Amendment No. 55. Although it looks like a sizeable chunk of text, Amendment No. 55 essentially introduces two new provisions while tightening the drafting of the Bill. Amendment No. 54 is a consequential drafting amendment.
§ The first provision is that the health committee would be required to impose, rather than just to consider, the minimum period of suspension, or conditions, on the osteopath's registration that it considers reasonably necessary to safeguard members of the public. The second provides for the health committee to be able to impose less onerous conditions or a shorter period of suspension as well as to revoke such restrictions, which is the only alternative currently provided by the Bill, should it subsequently consider them too onerous. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 55:
§
Page 9, line 9, leave out from ("proposals") to end of line 21 and insert:
("(5A) When making any order under subsection (4) (c), the health committee shall not impose a period of suspension which is longer, or conditions which are more onerous, than the minimum which they consider reasonably necessary to achieve the purpose mentioned in subsection (4) (a).
§ (6) If, at any time after the health committee have made an order under subsection (4) (c) ("the original order"), it appears to them of their own motion or on an application made to them in that behalf—
- (a) that the continuation of the order is no longer reasonably necessary to achieve the purpose mentioned in subsection (4) (a); or
- (b) that that purpose could be achieved with a shorter period of suspension or with less onerous conditions;
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
1414
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 56:
Page 9, line 23, leave out ("has expired or").
§ The noble Lord said: In moving this amendment I shall, with the leave of the Committee, speak also to Amendments Nos. 57 to 63. As currently drafted, the Bill enables the health committee to renew an order suspending or imposing restrictions on an osteopath's registration after the original order has expired. That runs contrary to natural justice. It also states that the grounds for continuing suspension or conditional registration would be that the osteopath continues to suffer from the condition which led to the making of the original order. However, there are many long-term medical conditions which are capable of being sufficiently controlled through proper treatment so as no longer to impair the osteopath's abilities to perform his professional functions competently and safely.
§ The other amendments provide for any new orders to be subject to the same considerations as the original order; namely, that only the minimum restrictions considered reasonably necessary to safeguard members of the public should be imposed, that the new orders would be subject to downward variation or revocation if they were subsequently considered too onerous and that any further renewal should be made before the expiry of the existing order. The duration of new orders would be restricted to a maximum period of three years. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendments Nos. 57 to 63:
§ Page 9, line 27, leave out from beginning to ("a"), in line 28, and insert ("remains unfit to perform his professional functions as an osteopath by reason of the condition which led to the making of the order or of).
§ Page 9, line 30, leave out ("still").
§ Page 9, line 32, at end insert ("for a period not exceeding three years").
§ Page 9, line 37, at end insert ("and").
§ Page 9, line 39, leave out from ("proposals") to end of line 44.
§ Page 9, line 45, leave out ("subsection (7)") and insert ("subsections (6) and (7)").
§
Page 9, line 47, at end insert:
("(8A) Subsection (5A) applies in relation to an order under subsection (7) as it applies in relation to one under subsection (4) (c).").
§ On Question, amendments agreed to.
§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 64:
§ Page 10, leave out lines 2 to 8, and insert:
- ("(a) may at any time hold a hearing in connection with the exercise by them of any of their functions under this section; and
- (b) shall hold a hearing before making any determination under subsection (1) or any order under subsection (4) or (7), if the osteopath concerned has asked in writing for a hearing.
§ (10) At any hearing held by the health committee for purposes of this section the osteopath concerned may be represented by a barrister, advocate or solicitor or by any other person.").
§ The noble Lord said: Amendment No. 64 is essentially a drafting amendment designed to clarify 1415 the occasions when a hearing before the health committee can be held. That would be at any time of the committee's choosing, and at the written request of the osteopath, before it made any decision to impose or renew a period of suspension or conditional registration. At any hearing the osteopath could be represented by a person of his choosing. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 12, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 13 agreed to.
§ Clause 14 [Appeals from the Professional Conduct and Health Committees]:
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 65:
Page 10, line 30, leave out ("(2)") and insert ("(1)").
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 14, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clauses 15 to 23 agreed to.
§ In the schedule:
§
Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendment No. 66:
Page 17, line 1, leave out ("four") and insert ("eight").
§ The noble Lord said: With the leave of the Committee I shall, while moving this amendment, speak also to Amendment No. 67, which is a consequential drafting amendment, and to Amendment No. 68. It would be the responsibility of the education committee to promote high standards of education in osteopathy by specifying the standards required for registration, by visiting the bodies providing training and examinations and by coordinating all stages of education.
§ As currently drafted, the Bill provides for the membership of the education committee to include four co-opted members. Amendment No. 66 seeks to increase the number of co-opted members to eight, thereby enabling the committee to call upon a potentially wider range of experience which it might consider necessary in order to fulfil its responsibilities. Paragraph 17(2) of the schedule requires that co-opted members to the education committee must be employed in osteopathic teaching but not at a school or institution where a member of the general council is employed.
§ However, the profession is concerned that if restrictions on the credentials of the co-opted members are made in the Act, the education committee may not be able to perform its functions adequately. Amendment No. 68 would remove those restrictions from the legislation and would allow such matters to be decided at the discretion of the general council. I beg to move.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Lord Walton of Detchant moved Amendments Nos. 67 and 68:
§ Page 19, line 5, leave out from ("co-opt") to end of line 7 and insert ("further members on to the Committee, but the number of such further members at any time shall not exceed—
- (a) in the case of the Investigating and Education Committees, eight, and
- (b) in the case of the Professional Conduct and Health Committees, four.").
§ Page 19, line 8, leave out sub-paragraph (2).
1416§ On Question, amendments agreed to.
§ Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
§ House resumed: Bill reported with amendments.