Health and Social Care Bill

I am delighted to say that my probing amendments succeeded in their purpose, because that was a very helpful reply from the Minister. I say to the noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, that I do not for a minute dispute or argue with the public’s expectation that Parliament should be the body that looks at and decides on the broad requirements for registered providers. Of course Parliament should be accountable in that sense and there should be regulations. The Minister has helpfully confirmed what I had hoped: that prescriptiveness is not in the Government’s mind and that the main thing that matters is safe services of appropriate quality, as she said. I hope that we will get a set of regulations before us that give a clear steer to the commission to exercise its professional judgment in individual cases, but that we will not try to shoehorn every provider into a prescribed mould, because that is futile. As my noble friend Lady Cumberlege said, following the passage of the Care Standards Act we found how damaging that approach was. Very good care providers were being penalised and in some cases had to close for no reason other than that the room sizes or some technical measures failed to meet the laid-down prescription. In many cases, it was a tragedy that that should have been allowed, for such reasons are by no means the only measures of good care in any individual instance. I thank the Minister once again for her reply and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendments Nos. 44 to 47 not moved.]