§ Baroness Perry of Southwarkasked Her Majesty's Government:
Why they have changed their plans for the National Health Service University.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Lord Warner)My Lords, the NHS is going through an unprecedented period of growth and improvement. As part of this, we remain committed to widening access to training and education for all NHS staff, the original purpose of the NHS University. We consider that that purpose can best be achieved through the new NHS Institute for Learning, Skills and Innovation, to integrate and strengthen the way we support people development, service improvement and technological innovation in the NHS.
§ Baroness Perry of SouthwarkMy Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Can he explain to the taxpayers and the 13 universities that were involved why the NHS University, which was launched with enormous fanfare and given a vice-chancellor designate fewer than two years ago and has since then spent £50 million of taxpayers' money, been turned down for the title of university by the Privy Council and failed to gain an adequate number of students, has now, it seems, in the words of the noble Lord, Lord Warner, passed its sell-by date?
§ Lord WarnerMy Lords, the NHS University has made important progress since it was first conceived. We have a different interpretation of history, but that is not unusual between this side and the party opposite, particularly on the NHS. The university has provided education and training to thousands of NHS staff. However, because of the Government's success in developing a wide range of training and education opportunities that meet the needs of NHS staff, the situation has changed. The NHS University was primarily a provider; we are now moving to a situation where many of those other providers offer the training programmes that our NHS staff need. The role and situation have changed, so we are making the same 640 kind of changes—as I understand from yesterday's James report announcement—as the party opposite wants to make.
§ Lord Campbell of AllowayMy Lords, why, on a point of interpretation, are the wards now being padlocked?
§ Lord WarnerMy Lords, I am not sure that that has much to do with the Question.
§ Earl HoweMy Lords, as my noble friend said in her supplementary question, in its brief existence the NHS University has spent around £50 million of taxpayers' money. With that money, it set itself a target to have helped 100,000 people to receive educational and training opportunities by April 2005. Precisely how many people has the NHS University helped so far?
§ Lord WarnerMy Lords, it is certainly in the area of tens of thousands of NHS staff. I shall write to the noble Lord with more precise figures.
§ Lord Corbett of Castle ValeMy Lords, instead of carping about some minor administrative change in the health service, would we not be better thanking those employed in that service, who deliver a first-class service day in, day out, in improved hospitals, accident and emergency units and cancer units up and down the country?
§ Lord WarnerMy Lords, my noble friend is right. I think that it is very uncomfortable for the party opposite that under this Government death rates from coronary heart disease and cancer have fallen by unprecedented levels due to the Government's investment in the NHS.
§ Baroness NeubergerMy Lords, most people welcomed the idea of the NHS University when it was first mooted because it was particularly designed to help people to get access to education. What will happen under this new system, with the new organisation, NILSI, to ensure that the low-paid and least-skilled workers, to whom we are all grateful, now really get access to foundation courses, which they have not had thus far with the NHSU?
§ Lord WarnerMy Lords, it is worth bearing in mind that, during the three years from April 2003, more than £180 million will be invested in support of NHS learning accounts, NVQs, adult literacy and numeracy and language skills development. That will help the very people about whom the noble Baroness is concerned. Specifically between April 2003 and March 2004, 100,000 NHS staff accessed NHS learning accounts and undertook NVQ training for levels two and three.
§ Lord DearingMy Lords, may we take it from the Minister's conviction of the value of training and education for NHS staff that, first, there will be no reduction in the level of funding? Secondly, will it take 641 full advantage of the Government-created University for Industry, distance learning, colleges and higher education?
§ Lord WarnerMy Lords, the health sector will of course take full advantage of all the opportunities available. The new NHS Knowledge and Skills Framework is a key part of the Agenda for Change programme. It will enable staff and managers to use joint personal development planning to identify development and career opportunities.
§ Baroness Gardner of ParkesMy Lords, is the Minister aware—
§ Lord Hunt of Kings HeathMy Lords—
§ Baroness Gardner of ParkesI think it is our turn.
§ The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Amos)My Lords, my noble friend has taken two supplementary questions from the Opposition Benches and only one from these Benches.
§ Lord Hunt of Kings HeathI am sorry, my Lords. I could not hear my noble friend. In view of the laudable aim to develop training and education for many of our low-paid workers and people just starting in the health service in the way described, has my noble friend analysed the impact on those staff made by the Tory announcement of that party's intention to reduce funding for initiatives of this kind?
§ Lord WarnerMy Lords, I am glad that my noble friend has raised the issue because I think that it is a very serious matter. By way of reminder, let me give the House a snippet from what the Conservative Party proposed yesterday in relation to the NHS University:
It would transfer functions to another Department of Health body. It would restructure and simplify regulation of the NHS".The fact that the NHS University is not even a regulated body seems to have escaped the James review. The review then sets out a series of totally unspecified proposals for saving money in this area, while we have set out very clearly in our review of arm's-length bodies precisely what we would do in merging the NHS University with NHS Modernisation Agency work and the new Innovation Centre. These are bean-counter proposals gone mad.
§ Baroness Gardner of ParkesMy Lords, is it not a fact—
§ The Earl of OnslowMy Lords—
§ Baroness Gardner of ParkesI am sorry, my Lords, but I think it is my turn. I have been waiting a long time to speak. Is it not a fact that the proposal for an NHS University was included in the 2001 Labour Party manifesto for that general election? Is it not therefore 642 rather strange that, having included it in a manifesto, given it a brief life, the Government are now killing it off before the next manifesto is published?
§ Lord WarnerMy Lords, as I have explained, when situations change, wise governments review their position. That is exactly what we are doing in this case.