Health Bill [HL]

I thank the noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, for explaining why his constituents were so well served during his time down the other end and for initiating me into some of the black arts of MPs. Not having served down the other end, I was not aware of them. It is important to say that he is right about the way in which Members of Parliament and, to some extent, Members of your Lordships' House have traditionally dealt with information from the National Health Service. I am not going to deny that the NHS is still a particularly deep resource for political ammunition. With the changes in the way in which the regulators have reported over the past couple of years and have gone about their business, we have managed to move on ever so slightly from that and have begun to receive data that look much more critically at these things. There is a long way to go, and the Minister’s major undertaking to try to measure quality will need different ways of reporting in future. Earlier this afternoon, the Minister mentioned that he does not propose to allow financial auditing into quality auditing yet, but in due course, he will. I am seeking, in a modest way, to try to find a way in which his proposal could be given a fair assessment by Parliament. In education, when comparative league tables came in, there was a period when Select Committees took apart that mechanism and subjected it to significant scrutiny. No doubt in years to come, the Health Select Committee will investigate quality accounts. If it does, I hope it will take this discussion into account and that the analysis we ultimately get is not unduly unfair to quality accounts and to what the Minister is trying to do. Amendment 48 withdrawn. Amendment 49 not moved.