[tim gilling]

A link to the transcript is here - the debate on reconfiguration starts with Liz kendall introducing amendment 40 and continues over the next few pages

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa...17p-01.htm

[Claire Lee]

The definition of 'designated services' (which the requirement to consult HOSCs/LAs and the ability to refer changes will apparently relate to) seems to be narrowing by the minute. According to Health Service Journal reporting on events at the Bill Committee:

Speaking at the Health and Social Care Bill Committee Mr Burns (minister) said the provision for services to be "designated" was intended for services "where there is one provider in an area".

Those services that are not designated will not be subject to borrowing controls or tight restrictions over closures.

Shadow health minister Liz Kendall asked Mr Burns whether his definition of designated services meant that accident and emergency services in London would qualify.

He said: "A designated service will be one to ensure that across the country there are appropriate services to meet the needs of the people. There are a number of A&E services in London, so there would not be a need to designate them... If I was talking about Cornwall, A&E would be designated there."

The discussion came after Ms Kendall proposed an amendment to the Bill which would ensure that fundamental changes to non-designated services would still require formal public consultation. The amendment was not passed.

[tim gilling]

A link to the Hansard transcript of the debate Claire refers to is here:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa...301s01.htm

The discussion on reconfiguration and 'designated services' relates to clause 5.

The 'designation' of services, the potential restriction of referral rights to changes to 'designated services' and decisions to refer being made through full council are likely to continue as the Bill progresses.

[tim gilling]

Clause 175 (review and scrutiny) was debated yesterday

A link to the transcript is here (scroll down to clause 175):

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa...310s01.htm

A CfPS/LGG sponsored amendment designed to retain separate, independent health scrutiny committees was laid by Emily Thornberry.

We got a good airing for our views and our briefing notes were quoted extensively.

The amendment was not successful but the debate was fascinating, especially regarding the referral of 'designated services'.

There was also some interesting discussion later in the session about GP commission plans/health and wellbeing boards and scrutiny committees.