All 2 Debates between Lord Lansley and Fiona O'Donnell

Business of the House

Debate between Lord Lansley and Fiona O'Donnell
Thursday 13th September 2012

(12 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Lansley Portrait Mr Lansley
- Hansard - -

Yes, I have seen the early-day motion in my hon. Friend’s name. Of course, the Charity Commission is not a regulator of religion, and it should be explaining its responsibilities and doing so in a way that commands confidence.

Fiona O'Donnell Portrait Fiona O’Donnell (East Lothian) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

A high street payday loan broker in my constituency has been standing outside a primary school handing out balloons to children and leaflets asking whether they are struggling to afford a school uniform. May we have an urgent debate on effective regulation of this predatory sector?

Lord Lansley Portrait Mr Lansley
- Hansard - -

I will, if I may, invite my hon. Friends from the Department for Education to respond on that issue, with which I confess I am not familiar.

Health and Social Care (Re-committed) Bill

Debate between Lord Lansley and Fiona O'Donnell
Tuesday 6th September 2011

(13 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Lansley Portrait Mr Lansley
- Hansard - -

No.

The OFT and the Competition Commission would obtain Monitor’s view on how a proposed merger would affect competition in the sector and whether it would bring benefits for patients. These views would then be considered, along with other evidence. However, the OFT would have discretion not to refer, where patient benefits outweighed any adverse impacts on competition—further illustration of the fact that competition law is not about promoting competition as an end in itself.

In conclusion—

Fiona O'Donnell Portrait Fiona O'Donnell (East Lothian) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will the Secretary of State give way?

Lord Lansley Portrait Mr Lansley
- Hansard - -

No.

I return to the choice offered in this group of amendments between the Government and Opposition Members. The Government are putting forward a range of amendments to protect patients’ interests and to safeguard them when providers run into difficulties and access to services is threatened. The amendments show that the Government have listened and improved the Bill. These amendments are on top of the changes made at earlier stages to strengthen the safeguards and protections offered by Monitor as a new provider regulator.

The Opposition simply want to delete the whole of that part—delete the safeguards to stop price competition, delete the means to stop cherry-picking, delete the means to enable NHS providers to work on a level playing field. The Government’s new clauses and amendments move us forward with the right safeguards in place. Labour would take us back. I urge the House to support the Government new clauses and amendments in this group—specifically, new clauses 2 and 6 and amendments 90 to 107, 113 to 220, and 366 to 372.