Mental Health Bill [HL]

My Lords, I was remiss in not referring to my noble friend in my winding-up speech. It has been rather lonely at times during our debates and I wish to pay tribute to him for his very strong support. Of course, this matter has been checked and rechecked with our legal advisers because it is clearly very important. I must pay tribute also to the noble Lord, Lord Elton, for his heroic role in mental health legislation in the past. The framework of the 1983 Act has stood the test of time. The construct of the law, in laying out how patients can be detained and treatment given under compulsion, is very clear. The statutory code of practice has been a very good way not only of informing practitioners working within the auspices of the Act but of allowing the code to change and develop over time in the light of emerging ideas and changes in practice, while at the same time being subject to strong public and parliamentary scrutiny. We have that framework and will continue to do so. The decision in the Munjaz case is extremely helpful in that practitioners and all concerned understand the status of the code. I do not think that it is possible to give any more clarity than that, and I think we ought to pay tribute to the practitioners who will have to work with the legislation. We will give them as much guidance and help as we can, but we must acknowledge that they will have to use their professional and clinical autonomy to make the best decisions they can in the best interests of their patients. But they will have to do so in the light of the legislation governing their actions and under the guidance that will be given in the code of practice—guidance which is now informed, if noble Lords accept the amendment, by the principles now enunciated. It is impossible to say fairer than that. On Question, amendment agreed to.