Governments often pursue brave, bold new policies. But genuinely brave Government isn’t always about acting; it’s about listening, understanding and acting. And it’s also about admitting when you haven’t got it right. You’d have to have been living on another planet not to know that we have “paused” the Health and Social Care Bill. Our Sheffield conference made it perfectly clear that Liberal Democrats will not sign up to proposals without changes. We understand that this has to be much more than superficial tinkering. The message has been received loud and clear: only substantial changes will do. And that’s exactly what we intend to do. But there has also been another example of how this Government is prepared to listen and to act.
A huge shake-up of the NHS could be delayed by weeks if not months, the Deputy Prime Minister said today.
Nick Clegg said he believed the Health and Social Care Bill would need to go back to a committee of MPs for further scrutiny. This is where proposed legislation is examined
Nick Clegg spoke this morning at University College London Hospital on reform of the National Health Service. The text in full:
We are now in the final stages of the Government’s listening exercise on proposals to reform the NHS.
An unusual thing for government to do: pausing legislation because we didn’t get all of the substance right. Accepting that we now need to make changes – in some cases, significant ones.
The NHS Bill will be substantially changed – that was the message from Liberal Democrat MP and Health Minister Paul Burstow at Lewisham Liberal Democrats on Friday night. It won’t just be changed, he said, it will be changed in a distinctively Liberal Democrat direction.
At the heart of the likely changes is the role of Monitor, the proposals for which Paul bluntly said were got wrong first time round. Though he was careful not to directly criticise Andrew Lansley, he did say that the original proposals for Monitor were to adopt the model of regulator used with privatised utilities and …
Over at The Guardian, Baroness Shirley Williams has a piece setting out the problems she has with the government’s proposed NHS reforms, and four substantive changes that the Liberal Democrats would like to see made.
Here’s a sample:
First, the role of the secretary of state: as the excellent fifth report of the House of Commons health committee pointed out, the public, who pay for the NHS, look to the secretary of state to be responsible for the delivery of a comprehensive health service, one that is equitable, accessible to all, and free at the time of use. The National Commissioning Board will
One of the things which Ed Miliband does right at Prime Minister’s Questions, is to start with short, straight-forward questions. He’s obviously realized this is a good ploy, as he does it invariably. Today’s shorty was: “A year into his Government, how would the Prime Minister rate his handling of the NHS?”
It’s taken a while for David Cameron to work out how best to answer these shorties. He started by waffling like billy-o, tying himself up in knots. Then he tried a short reply and came a cropper there as well. So now he goes middle for diddle with a …
You would expect that the electoral disaster faced by the Lib Dems last Thursday, with hundreds of councillors losing their seats and the referendum on fairer Votes comprehensively lost, would have overshadowed the weekend’s political activity. Not so in Hackney, where the local party and friends gathered in the sunshine to discuss the apposite question, “what is happening to our NHS?” First to address the issues around the government’s proposed reforms was health Minister Paul Burstow, and in fairness he did begin by paying tribute to the hard-working activists who had to deal with …
The House Magazine has a new feature out looking at the likely political fallout from Thursday’s elections and referendum. It looks at both a Yes or a No vote, including this from me on future Lib Dem / Labour relations:
At the launch of the Yes2AV campaign, a tantalising glimpse into the future was offered for those who dream of a unification of the progressive left. On the stage at Methodist Central Hall sat Labour leader Ed Miliband, Green leader Caroline Lucas, and Liberal Democrat stalwarts Charles Kennedy and Shirley Williams. And Tim Farron, Lib Dem party president and a likely future leadership contender, was there too. However, Mark Pack, co-editor of Lib Dem Voice, warns against reading too much into the apparent bonhomie. “Coalitions are driven by parliamentary arithmetic far more than by politicians’ own preferences,” Pack says. “So the answer really depends on the public rather than how relations between politicians are affected by the referendum.
It also quotes Olly Grender on the possible policy implications of a No vote:
If the referendum is lost, then disgruntled Lib Dem backbenchers will be keen to contribute to a ‘shopping list’ for Nick Clegg to take to David Cameron. Insiders say the plans to reform the NHS will become a priority, while proposals for reform of the Upper House will be published at the end of the month. Olly Grender, former communications chief for the Lib Dems, sets out the desired gains from the NHS and Social Care Bill:
“There should be clear safeguards regarding the issue of competition and the private sector, and funding should be secured on the understanding that reform and reduction are impossible to achieve together,” Grender argues. “There should also be a change of pace regarding the introduction of GP consortia.” Further goals, says Grender, should include “a faster drive towards the increased threshold of £10,000 helping people on lowest incomes during the toughest times”, while greater safeguards of critical public services – “whilst continuing to try to pay down the deficit” – should, she says, be put in place. On top of House of Lords reform, Grender argues, climate change and social mobility need greater emphasis.
I’ve talked in more detail about what to watch out for in Thursday’s results in this YouTube clip:
Over on the Wales Home website, Veronica German, Assembly Member for South Wales East up to the recent dissolution of the Assembly and candidate for that seat, has written a piece setting out the Welsh Liberal Democrats’ policies for the NHS.
Here’s an excerpt:
We need a modern NHS, that is worthy of our time – which is cost-effective, efficient and delivers better services. The more money we save by cutting inefficiencies, the more we can spend on delivering the best possible services for you and your family.
Welsh Liberal Democrats will cut waiting times by investigating claims of ineffective spending in
Lib Dem Voice has polled our members-only forum to discover what Lib Dem members think of various political issues, the Coalition, and the performance of key party figures. Over 500 party members have responded, and we’re publishing the full results this week.
Lib Dems reject key health reform measure 61%-24%
LDV asked: The government are currently planning to reform the NHS. Currently health services are commissioned by local Health Trusts. Under the government’s plans local Health Trusts would be abolished, and health services would instead be commissioned by consortiums made up of groups of local GPs. From what you have …
The story of Adam being enticed to take the apple by Eve is not merely an amusing insight into the human condition, its an example of the very first market at work.
Markets work on the principal that people respond to stimuli, economics tries to ascertain what those stimuli are, and what the impact of those stimuli on the wider community are.
The idea that the government, can or should, protect certain sectors of the economy from the market is a fallacy.
While I don’t agree with the Coalition’s (or indeed Labour’s) policy on University funding, the argument occasionally made, that charging fees …
On 8th April Norman wrote an interesting article here entitled “The NHS: safe in our hands”. That article is a good basis on which to discuss a few of the problems with the bill and the Government’s approach so far.
We should be clear that Norman Lamb is one of the good guys, who spotted earlier than most the problems with the White Paper and the Bill, and has been very clear that it requires radical surgery. He has also been particularly concerned, and this week expressed this publicly, that the pace of change is financially (and …
The NHS is our most treasured institution; designed by a Liberal it is based on a great British idea – that we will care together, collectively for one another in our time of need. Treatment free, when you need it, not when you can afford it. That’s an idea that must never be undermined.
People want to see Liberal Democrats in government protecting and improving the NHS, and this week we have shown that’s exactly what we are doing. The government is pausing – stopping the clock on its NHS reforms to listen, reflect and improve the legislation – in direct …
With yesterday’s holding announcement from Andrew Lansley – yes, the health plans might be changed but no, there are no details as yet – the future of the health White Paper is very much up for grabs. It’s not quite as simple as Liberal Democrats versus Conservatives, as although there are not many Conservatives who share the principled objections to parts of the plans from the Liberal Democrats, there are many who share concerns over the practical workings of the detail and fear the political impact.
“Nick Clegg has just won a powerful victory over the Conservatives, appointing a Bill of Rights commission which is certain to leave the ECHR intact” – The Spectator has the news.
As Dr Tim Morgan points out in his incisive Centre for Policy Studies pamphlet, Five Fiscal Fallacies, “No one should imagine that the Coalition’s plans amount to a major reversal
On Saturday I gave a guarantee to every party member that I, along with other Liberal Democrat members of the Government would listen to every word that you had to say. I completely stand by that. If there are ways in which we can amend the Health and Social Care Bill then we will work to do it. But what we won’t do is to allow our Spring Conference to be hijacked and used as a political tool by Labour. And that’s exactly what they tried to do today.
Today was one of Labour’s designated days in Parliament when they are …
To amplify that, we can now bring you an almost full recording of the debate. Thrill at procedural niceties! Coo at the applause for Baroness Williams! And bask in the self-righteous glow from delegates that no other party still has debates like this.
Apologies that the recording starts halfway through Paul Burstow’s introductory speech. It took longer than expected for me to wake up and eat breakfast clear security at City Hall.
There’s a common theme to the party’s official reactions to both the Disability Living Allowance (Mobility Component) and health reform motions being passed at conference today. That is to welcome the party staking out its own views on the issues, even where they clearly contradict those of Conservative ministers, and for two reasons.
First, it more clearly sets out where the coalition partners disagree on policy. As having a relaxed, adult approach to admitting in public that people in government don’t always agree on everything is something I’ve talked about in the past, this is certainly good to see – and …
Richard Kemp summates on motion, asking people also to back both amendments; i.e. cooperation rather confrontation to improve bill. Some MPs vote for amendment 1, some abstain. Amendment overwhelmingly carried. As is amendment 2. Lines 6-15 deleted from motion, amended motion carried. All MPs can spot voted for.
Evan Harris summates on amendment 1. “It is unusual for me to summate on a debate where there have been no speeches against my amendment”. Says government ministers must work hard to change the bill radically. Amendment 1 lays out how it should be improved – and Liberal Democrats in government “should follow …
This is the first spring conference since we entered Government. In all the years I’ve been a Liberal Democrat I’ve never known of such a potentially explosive spring conference. Or at least that’s what the media would have you believe. Debating policy is part of our DNA. And it shouldn’t change now that we’re in Government. This spring conference we’ll be debating the coalition’s proposals to update the NHS. And unlike in the media, it won’t be a case of who shouts loudest wins.
I understand why people are so concerned. Every time I meet party members …
Saturday morning in Sheffield this weekend sees the LibDem conference debating two of the areas of coalition which have generated the most controversy: the NHS and the future of the Disability Living Allowance.
The motion on the Disability Living Allowance (F4) has been slightly overtaken by events as the debate within government over the Welfare Reform Bill develops and in fact the plans in this area have in effect been sent back to the drawing board. That makes the motion all the more important, because rather than being simply a chance to cast a verdict on what the government has done, it is a chance to influence what is yet to be decided. The heart of the motion calls for “the Coalition Government to reinstate the Mobility Component or otherwise fund the mobility needs of those who cannot afford to do so themselves”.
Straight after this debate comes one on the NHS (F5). The choice of Andrew Wiseman, Federal Conference Committee’s chair, to chair this debate is a good sign that this is expected to be one of the liveliest of conference as is the news that two Liberal Democrat MPs have signed an EDM expressing concerns over the policy.
Buried in the middle of the motion are lines 16-17 which says that “Conference welcomes the vision for the NHS set out in the Government’s White Paper”. That may be glossed over as a bit of padding between long lists of less controversial points or it may be the trigger for an all-out row, as also may be the amendment likely to be debated that is coming from ex-MP and doctor Evan Harris and Lib Dem peer Shirley Williams (who made her views clear in “I can’t support the coalition plan for the NHS“).
The gap between what the amendment calls for and what Liberal Democrats in government have been pressing for is not that large, however – and some have already expressed the view that the amendment may be a good route to getting more changes made to the health plans. That will provide a pointed choice for those promoting the amendment – whether to try to bring about change through aggressive antagonism or through emollient persuasion? And is modifying the government plans or setting out what a Liberal Democrat majority government would do their top priority?
The full text of both motions are in the Spring Conference Agenda and Directory embedded below.
One of the very reasons I became a Liberal Democrat in the first place was be cause of strong women within the party who held similar beliefs to my own. Baroness Williams is one of those women, but she has something else which is equally important in these times of coalition government.
Shirley Williams has a wonderful way of saying that she disagrees with the coalition without it being dramatic or overly sentimental. In her opinion piece in The Times she lays out her thoughts as to why she cannot support the coalition and its proposals for the National …
By Judith Jolly
| Sun 30th January 2011 - 12:37 pm
In recent months, LDV has been bringing its readers copies of our new MPs’ and Peers’ first words in Parliament, so that we can read what is being said and respond. You can find all of the speeches in this category with this link. Earlier in January, Baroness Jolly of of Congdon’s Shop in the County of Cornwall, made her maiden speech in the House of Lords during a debate on the NHS. Her words are reproduced below.
My Lords, I start by thanking noble Lords kindly for the warm welcome that I have found since my introduction on Tuesday-from Members opposite as well as from my own Benches. Advice about my speech was to keep it simple, but most of all to keep it short. I extend these thanks to members of staff who have been exceptionally helpful in all manner of ways. I must say that I am not without trepidation. My introduction by comparison was easy, as once in my robes I was but an actor. Today, I feel somewhat naked without them, particularly in such eminent company.
By Paul Burstow
| Thu 20th January 2011 - 10:25 am
The greatest enemy of truth is not the lie but the myth. This could have been written with our health proposals in mind. Let me start with the myth that our plans are ‘revolutionary’. The ‘revolutionary’ label embodies neatly what many people wrongly envisage to be untried and untested changes to the NHS. Swamped by all the myth, misunderstanding and mistruths, the facts have struggled to get heard. So let me give you a few of the facts.
Under the previous Labour Government healthcare spending increased significantly. But where Britain spent big, other countries spent better. That is why Britain has …
I am a GP and Executive Member for Care and Health on Bristol City Council. I have been a GP for nearly 30 years, but I took on the Cabinet role on Tuesday 11th May 2010 – the day the astonishing Coalition was formed between Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs in London.
That Coalition has made some bold proposals for our NHS, and for the way that the NHS works with patients, public health, and local authorities. These proposals drew together themes that Liberal Democrats have been campaigning on for many years such as putting patients at the heart of the …
By Paul Burstow
| Tue 30th November 2010 - 6:14 pm
Britain is now the most obese nation in Europe. We have among the worst rates of sexually transmitted infections on record. Rising levels of harm from alcohol, and over 80,000 lives lost every year because of smoking. These are the public health challenges the Coalition Government faces.
And what of Labour’s public health legacy? Under Labour inequalities in health and life expectancy between rich and poor got worse. As a result people in the poorest areas can expect to live up to 7 years less than people in richer areas.
Under Labour huge amounts of money was spent on public …
By Paul Burstow
| Tue 16th November 2010 - 4:28 pm
Earlier today the government announced its social care plans. Paul Burstow explains the thinking behind them and what they will achieve:
Social care is essential for most people at some time in their life. It embraces the most intimate care for people, often at times of great distress. At its core, social care is about helping people to live their lives. It should enable people, and their carers, to live the independent life most of us take for granted. But this isn’t happening. Instead of a system that protects and enables the most vulnerable, we have an unsustainable and iniquitous …
Over on the BBC website is a set of graphs about health spending, neatly and clearly laying out some of the issues with health spending, how it has grown in the past and what future plans may mean. Go take a look here.
By Paul Burstow
| Tue 9th November 2010 - 11:05 am
Much has been made of the tough choices Liberal Democrats have had to make since we entered government. But not enough has been made of the victories we’ve gained. Unlike the last Labour administration, this coalition is delivering on its promises to reform health and social care for the better.
Let’s start with social care. The funding of care and support is one of the most urgent of all social policy issues we face as a society. Make no mistake; the way we organise and pay for care for older and disabled people is a broken. That’s why we’re taking action …
As Liberal Democrats we are unique in our commitment to personal freedom. Our battles for liberty have gone hand in hand with a dedication to social progress. We want freedom but not a society that walks on by.
Getting this balance right is a central part of our party’s policy consultation recently launched by Health Minister Paul Burstow.
It asks whether tobacco should be one of the main areas of focus for public health. The answer to this was given very clearly in the inquiry by the All Party Parliamentary Group for Smoking and Health, which I chair.
Peter Davies Another group for whom this does not work are those in all-electric homes including many poor tenants in blocks of flats. Their overall bills may well be high b...
Tom Bailey “according to Mark Pack’s website, party membership dropped by a third over the course of the Con – Lib Dem Coalition. “
Did anyone ask those lost memb...
Ruth Bright During the unrest in 2011 Simon Hughes made a powerful statement telling rioters to go home. It came from a place of profound respect for, and understanding of,...
John Reed This is such a disappointing announcement.
We must push to have the present system for pricing all electricity based on the cost of the most expensive, usual...
Peter Hirst I would add caring to bold and relevant. Getting a sympathetic ear at the end of a telephone help line is as important as an extra pound in your pay slip. Under...
Straight after this debate comes one on the NHS (F5). The choice of Andrew Wiseman, Federal Conference Committee’s chair, to chair this debate is a good sign that this is expected to be one of the liveliest of conference as is the news that 
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Brexit and summer holidays
The pine martens of Shropshire
The shame of Liverpool Labour councillors taking their allowances but not turning up to do the work
Peter Davies 
Tom Bailey 
Ruth Bright 
John Reed 
Peter Hirst 