Health and Social Care Bill

My Lords, the Minister already knows that, in moving the amendment, I use the example of the dangers of prescribed drugs and the urgent need to commission services for those suffering from addiction and withdrawal. This amendment follows the interesting amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, on Monday. I am sorry that I could not support him in his attempt at a Division because he said a lot of interesting things, although I know that this has become an historic occasion. That amendment pointed to the advantages of building on the work of voluntary organisations, especially those in the vanguard of meeting a particular need, as they are in this case. I know that the Minister has given an answer, that the board and clinical commissioning may want to find work that will assist in the effective commissioning of services: "““For instance, the board may provide funding to voluntary organisations with particular expertise in the provision of support to people with rare specialist conditions””.—[Official Report, 28/11/2011; col. 119]." I have some experience of voluntary organisations, and I know that, on the whole, they provide a cost-effective service; the argument has already been well made in the debate. Using the example of prescribed drugs, research into current services has shown that, in a few cases, the NHS is already working alongside very frail NGOs. In some cases, the relationship is symbiotic. For example, in Belfast a very skilled NHS worker is leading the team. In Bristol, Oldham and Newcastle the PCTs are part-funding local services and providing care workers. However, in most areas of the UK PCTs are woefully unaware of the problem and the department is woefully unaware that the PCTs are unaware, and therefore no-one is able to provide the necessary training and meet the need. The noble Lord, Lord Warner, spoke earlier about the shortcomings of PCTs as commissioning groups in certain situations. My first question is already answered: can the Minister assure me that he will do everything to support good practice in the voluntary sector for victims of prescribed drugs or for any other deserving category of patients? It would help if there was a duty to support NGOs in the Bill. I know that cannot be the case, and, as I say, the Minister has answered this. Coming specifically to Amendment 203, I will briefly repeat my interest, because, as the Minister already knows, a relative of mine has been confined to his room for over a year in almost constant pain, unable to take part in everyday life or even in family life. I do not wish to ask for special pleading, because he is one of perhaps 1.5 million people who have taken sleeping pills or other benzodiazepines who are now at risk from drug addiction which in some cases is worse than illegal drug addiction. Most of this is at the hands of doctors. As I said at Second Reading, the NHS has created a problem and it is up to the NHS to solve it. My research tells me that the Government are not solving it. They are confusing illegal with legal drugs and they are making polite noises about what they might do, but they are not doing it. They are making claims at a high level about services which are clearly not being provided at a lower level. While the voluntary sector is being forced to act on its own, the Government show little sign of supporting it and in the present climate are likely to resist anything new. My amendment is about the CCGs commissioning services themselves. I know that we are going through a period of change and it is very hard to see what is now a PCT or an emerging CCG. I do know that a service confronting benzo-addiction withdrawal is not an easy service to set up. Voluntary activity so often stems from the experience of individuals who have had such experiences. Up and down the country, there are some people of high quality who have either been through the perils of addiction themselves or have been very close to someone who has been addicted. They are the people who can do the job. They are remarkable not only because they are able to apply their experience as carers and therapists without training, but because they have also had to teach themselves management, the ability to start an office, to raise funds, to advertise a service and most of all to balance time and money when there are so many other things to think about. It is like a health service in miniature. These are the people whom this Bill should support and to whom the CCGs should have a duty. I beg to move.