Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

There we are: right at the death, my hon. Friend provides yet another useful contribution, as he has consistently done. It is perfectly sensible to suggest that this might not be an either/or situation. He is right to argue for the keeping of the patient voice. The matter should be looked at again. The Minister must acknowledge that there is some disquiet on Labour Benches. The Bill would be markedly strengthened if changes were made. Finally, let me mention the extraordinary story of the amendment signed by 51 Labour Members asking for greater local control over energy efficiency in new developments in their areas which, mysteriously, was not moved—and then not voted on—by any of those 51 Labour Members, some of whom then voted against their own amendment just last week. People have noted that, and it was particularly ironic as only the previous day the Minister for Housing and Planning had made much of the Government’s commitment to energy efficiency as the reason for continuing with the home improvement packs. She said how outraged she was that the Opposition were urging caution on HIPs, and that energy was an important issue. However, when there was an opportunity for the Government to vote on an amendment to make sure that energy efficiency was recognised at local level and that standards were driven still higher, they did not take it. Having said that, and having pointed out where measures are deficient, I acknowledge that there has been genuine progress. The Local Government Association and councillors agree. We hope that we have made the Bill better through our deliberations and our work. We are sure that the other place will continue to do the same, and when amendments return to the House we hope that the Bill will be further strengthened in the manners that I have suggested.