My Lords, let us be clear. It was no cheap shot. It was a comment on how the previous Government carried through their policies. He will know very well that I sat on those Benches and asked the questions of him. I am very much aware of it. What I said had nothing to do with corporate governance. It was the specific proposal that GPs’ patients should be asked to express a view on the proposition that their general practitioner be part of a clinical commissioning group. As though there was some serious alternative to it, and that it was something that could be carried through willy-nilly without any potential disadvantage in the GPs’ conduct of the practice.
What I pointed out was that this is not something that has any kind of precedent; it was, as my noble friend said, ““novel””. What I said about it was quite clear. It has not been tried and I am not persuaded that it is something that has been well thought through. It could be very divisive within a practice. That is not at all to say that other elements of corporate governance are not appropriate. I wholly support them and the proposal. I was addressing a specific issue and I notice that it was the one issue that the noble Lord did not respond to.
Health and Social Care Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Alderdice
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 30 November 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Health and Social Care Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
733 c334 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 14:22:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791687
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791687
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791687