Injury on Duty Award Scheme

Securing habitat for endangered swifts and other cavity nesting birds

Found: (Conservative; Life peer) Lord Watson of Wyre Forest (Labour; Life peer) House of Commons Sir Bernard Jenkin

Found: (Conservative; Life peer) Lord Watson of Wyre Forest (Labour; Life peer) House of Commons Sir Bernard Jenkin

Found: Amendment) Regulations 2025Select Committee on Statutory Instruments Current membership Sir Bernard Jenkin

Found: (Conservative; Life peer) Lord Watson of Wyre Forest (Labour; Life peer) House of Commons Sir Bernard Jenkin

Found: electoral system has only been questioned once by a Member since its first implementation (by Sir Bernard Jenkin

<p>It could be,&nbsp;it could be. But I think, to be honest, it's not something that I feel strongly about in terms of unfinished business. For me, the real prizes in this were getting own initiative. You will have had evidence from other witnesses here that there is—. And I'm not into inter-UK rivalry, but I do have a huge sense of pride. I was over—. There was a leaving do for Rob Behrens, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman in the House of Commons last year; Sir Bernard Jenkin—[<em>Inaudible</em>.] They've been talking about ombudsman reform from before I started, right? I think it was Lloyd George who said, 'There's no greater eloquence than action'. They're still talking about it in England. I'm very fond of them; we learnt a lot through having discussions with the different jurisdictions. But own initiative was a huge prize: still not available in Scotland, still not available in England.</p>
<p>And there are a number of other reforms that they've been talking about in England/UK,&nbsp;because it's a difficult jurisdiction—you've got devolved and non-devolved issues for the PHSO and others. But we did that. Complaint standards powers: those were inspired by Scotland. There is some activity there, some significant activity, to be fair, in England, but it's not done on any kind of statutory basis. And, again, I go back to this issue of making sure that we're there to serve, and to serve the vulnerable, rather than having language that indicates that some well-paid official may consider—may consider—you. I didn't think that was appropriate. So, I think it's a much more progressive, democratic and futureproofed bit of legislation.</p>
<p>The power that was also given was the one on the ability to follow the citizen's path if they've gone for public and private healthcare. I'm astonished that that hasn't been taken up, particularly given what we've seen with huge increases in waiting lists and post-pandemic pressures, and all the rest of it. I would have bet a lot of money that that was going to be relevant. It still might be, but the fact that it hasn't been used to any extent, really, over the last three years is a real surprise to me.</p>