Health Bill [HL]

I shall be brief. First, since I started working in the National Health Service in 1948 when it first began, I have been one of its most fervent supporters. I firmly believe in the principles that led to the establishment of the NHS, and those principles are continuing. Nevertheless, having private patients and services working in partnership with the NHS is of value to it and helps to nurture its development. That is why I support the amendment. When I spoke so enthusiastically, with tongue in cheek, to the amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Palmer, I was simply concerned that any potential opposition from the Government might conceivably have been actuated by what I thought might be an outmoded and outworn ideology. However, when I heard the noble Baroness tell me what the costs would be, I was concerned. I am glad that the amendment was withdrawn. In this case, the argument of the noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, has been powerful. She has drawn to our attention a whole series of problems that are beginning to emerge in a number of the foundation trusts. What perhaps concerns me most is that the cap that has been imposed, as the noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, has said, was based upon the private charges in the base year of 2002-03—six or seven years ago. The Government have themselves changed their attitude and developed many more public/private partnerships over the succeeding seven years. The cap needs to be considerably revised. As the noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, has said, the legal framework of the private patient income cap is increasingly untenable. The amendment does not seek to remove the cap but to redefine it and, in doing so, to provide the opportunity to discuss how we can ensure that NHS patients derive even greater benefit from foundation trusts. For that reason, I support the amendment.