Vol. 737 Tuesday No. 4 15 May 2012 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICIAL REPORT ORDER OF BUSINESS Questions NHS: Risk Register Police: Misconduct and Corruption Democratic Republic of Congo Israel: Palestinian Hunger Strikers Mental Health (Discrimination) Bill [HL] First Reading Marine Navigation Bill [HL] First Reading Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Further Provisions and Support for Victims) Bill [HL] First Reading Extension of Franchise (House of Lords) Bill [HL] First Reading Standing Orders (Public Business) Motion to Agree Automatic Enrolment (Earnings Trigger and Qualifying Earnings Band) Order 2012 Motion to Refer to Grand Committee Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (Amendment) Order 2012 Motion to Refer to Grand Committee Greater London Authority Act 1999 (Amendment) Order 2012 Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 Motions to Refer to Grand Committee Queen’s Speech Debate (4th Day) Written Statements Written Answers For column numbers see back page £3·50 Lords wishing to be supplied with these Daily Reports should give notice to this effect to the Printed Paper Office. The bound volumes also will be sent to those Peers who similarly notify their wish to receive them. No proofs of Daily Reports are provided. Corrections for the bound volume which Lords wish to suggest to the report of their speeches should be clearly indicated in a copy of the Daily Report, which, with the column numbers concerned shown on the front cover, should be sent to the Editor of Debates, House of Lords, within 14 days of the date of the Daily Report. This issue of the Official Report is also available on the Internet at www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldhansrd/index/120515.html PRICES AND SUBSCRIPTION RATES DAILY PARTS Single copies: Commons, £5; Lords £3·50 Annual subscriptions: Commons, £865; Lords £525 WEEKLY HANSARD Single copies: Commons, £12; Lords £6 Annual subscriptions: Commons, £440; Lords £255 Index: Annual subscriptions: Commons, £125; Lords, £65. LORDS VOLUME INDEX obtainable on standing order only. Details available on request. BOUND VOLUMES OF DEBATES are issued periodically during the session. Single copies: Commons, £105; Lords, £40. Standing orders will be accepted. THE INDEX to each Bound Volume of House of Commons Debates is published separately at £9·00 and can be supplied to standing order. All prices are inclusive of postage. © Parliamentary Copyright House of Lords 2012, this publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through The National Archives website at www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/our-services/parliamentary-licence-information.htm Enquiries to The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU; email: [email protected] 247 NHS: Risk Register[15 MAY 2012] NHS: Risk Register 248 extremity of risks in any policy, whether it is policy A, House of Lords B or C? At the end of the day, they expect Ministers to look at those risks and take appropriate decisions. Tuesday, 15 May 2012. Against that background, therefore, the strategy that my noble friend is following is understood outside by 2.30 pm the ordinary public. It may not be understood by the lobby groups; nevertheless, it is the public whom we Prayers—read by the Lord Bishop of Wakefield. serve. NHS: Risk Register Earl Howe: My Lords, I am very grateful to my Question noble friend, and he is right. The risk assessment process, carried out by civil servants and detailed in 2.36 pm these registers, is an integral part of the formulation and development of government policy. It is in the Asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath public interest that this process be as effective as possible. We are clear that where policy is sensitive, To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they that necessitates confidentiality. consider the time will be right to publish the NHS risk register. Lord Martin of Springburn: My Lords, I take it that Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, I beg leave to the decision that was made was a government decision, ask the Question standing in my name on the Order which was collective. I recall that the Deputy Prime Paper and, in so doing, I declare an interest as chair of Minister, before he became Deputy Prime Minister, an NHS foundation trust and as a consultant and was very keen on transparency. Was he therefore trainer on the NHS and health issues. comfortable about the withholding of this information? If the noble Earl does not know, perhaps he could come back and let the House know. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Earl Howe): My Lords, the transition risk register will be published when the balance of public Earl Howe: My Lords, the decision to exercise the interest favours disclosure. We will continue to be open veto, which is a decision provided for under the Freedom about risk. Last week we published a document containing of information Act, was made by my right honourable information on all risk areas in the register, along with friend the Secretary of State for Health. However, he a scheme of publication for future review and release would not have been able to exercise the veto without of information on risk. the collective approval of the Cabinet, and that approval was secured. Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, I am extremely grateful to the noble Earl for that because he said that Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe: My Lords, last Thursday it would be published when the balance is in favour of I asked the Minister a question that he answered in the public interest. Can I take him back to the judgment part. The part that he did not answer was whether the of the First-tier Tribunal, which concluded that risk transitional risk register drew to the Government’s registers, attention the risk that patients would have to wait “would have provided the public with a far better understanding longer to see their GP. Speaking as someone who uses of the risks to a national institution”, the NHS and as part of the British public, I fear that on which millions depend? Surely the public interest the delays are getting longer and will continue to do and parliamentary scrutiny actually depended on that so. Could he please now answer the question about risk register being published, and it should have been whether or not this was in the risk register? published when the Bill was in this House. Earl Howe: I acknowledge that I did not answer Earl Howe: My Lords, we do not agree with that. that question and apologise to the noble Lord for not We have, as I have mentioned, published a document having done so last week. The whole issue of stakeholder setting out a summary of all the risks in the register support is one that the risk register addresses, as he and the mitigating actions associated with each category, will see from the document that we published. I do not but we resist publishing the risk register itself at present. recall the specific issue of waiting times to see one’s It is essential that officials are able to formulate sensitive GP arising in the risk register for the simple reason advice to Ministers, making frank assessments and that, although I acknowledge that it is currently a using direct language, without the fear of causing problem in some parts of the country, particularly unnecessary embarrassment for the Government or London, that is not a direct result of anything that the damage to their area of policy. That is the essence of Government are doing in our reform programme. the reason. Lord Tebbit: My Lords, would my noble friend Lord Naseby: Is my noble friend aware that there is decline to take lessons in these matters from those who nobody more passionate about the NHS than I am, supported former Prime Minister Blair in not publishing but that a great many people outside want civil servants a full and frank assessment of the intelligence reports and other advisers to Ministers to point out the whole on which he committed this country to a war? 249 NHS: Risk Register[LORDS] Police: Misconduct and Corruption 250 Earl Howe: My noble friend makes an extremely Police: Misconduct and Corruption good point because there are sensitive matters that any Question Government will inevitably wish to keep confidential if good government is to be maintained. 2.45 pm Asked by Lord Maginnis of Drumglass Lord Peston: My Lords, it is trivially obvious that all decision-making— To ask Her Majesty’s Government when it is appropriate for the Home Office to intervene directly Baroness Jolly: My Lords— in matters of police discipline and incidents of police corruption, and whether current delegated arrangements are proving adequate. Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, there is time, and we have not yet heard from the Liberal Democrat Back Benches. The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Henley): My Lords, the police are expected to maintain the highest standards of professional behaviour at all Noble Lords: Order! times. Where there are allegations of misconduct or corruption, the most serious cases are investigated by Baroness Anelay of St Johns: I am most grateful to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. As the noble Lord, Lord Peston, for resuming his seat. the name suggests, the IPCC is independent of the Naturally, only one person should be on their feet at Government and the police to ensure that investigations one time. There is time, although we have now wasted are impartial. The Government do not intervene in a little more of it, so perhaps we might hear from the any individual cases.