Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 62:"Page 12, line 45, at end insert—""““(   )   When the Secretary of State is notified of a failure in connection with the code under section 47A, he shall be responsible for the provision of resources necessary for the failing body to comply with the terms of the improvement notice.””" The noble Baroness said: The amendment seeks to probe the issue of resources for the implementation of the code of practice. The code is an interesting document, but it skirts around the question of resources, should they be needed to bring about improved infection control. While it is clear that much of the code rests on implementation of procedures which should not be radically different from those that already exist in hospitals—to a certain extent, they should seek simply to replicate good practice—for infection to be brought under control, new procedures will need to be adopted at some stage and new costs will be incurred. For example, the code states that all NHS bodies providing in-patient care must ensure that they have adequate isolation facilities to prevent the spread of healthcare-associated infection. What if they don’t? How do they conjure up new isolation facilities? Those are not easy to manufacture, when hospitals are no longer based on small units but tend to have more open wards rather than single rooms. Another part of infection control which we know to be important is cleaning. Cleaning services are already subject to tender in most places; they are tightly costed, because it is a competitive business. If a trust finds that its cleaning service is inadequate and contributes towards high rates of infection, how will it be able to change when cost—as well as best value—has most likely already been taken into account in its procurement? The amendment is an attempt to probe the Government on the likely level of resources to make sure that the code is implemented. I beg to move.