Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill

Lord Kamall Excerpts

Committee stage & Report stage
Monday 23rd February 2026 Lords Chamber

[The Deputy Speaker (Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall) (Lab)]

My Lords, I should advise the House that if this amendment is agreed to, I cannot call Amendment 15 by reason of pre-emption.

[Lord Kamall (Con)]

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Mohammed of Tinsley, for opening the debate on this group—and the numerous noble Lords who spoke to it.

I redeclare my interests. I am a professor of politics and international relations at St Mary’s University, Twickenham, where I teach a module on healthcare policy and strategy, and I have been helping with its new medical school. I also work with the Vinson Centre for the Public Understanding of Economics and Entrepreneurship at the University of Buckingham, which has a medical school, although I have no direct connection with the medical school there. I hope I have touched on all potential conflicts.

Amendment 14, from the noble Lord, and Amendment 16, in my name, were debated in Committee, so I do not intend to repeat the arguments that were made then. However, I think it would be helpful if we reminded ourselves that we are dealing with emergency legislation. This is key. The Constitution Committee has warned against the Government’s overuse of emergency legislation, not least because when we legislate in this way we risk creating unintended consequences. We should be very careful and selective in using emergency legislation. In that context, it does not seem unreasonable that your Lordships’ House should be given an opportunity to scrutinise secondary legislation in more detail through the affirmative procedure. I hope the Minister will take on board the concerns about using the affirmative procedure rather than other procedure.

Turning to Amendment 16, I have retabled this amendment for debate today because I am afraid that I was not completely satisfied with the Minister’s response in Committee. I am sorry to say that but, at Second Reading, the Minister explained that the Government’s view is that commencement may not happen with Royal Assent because the changes introduced by the Bill are “a major undertaking” and

“there is a material consideration about whether it is even possible to proceed if the strikes are ongoing”.

However, in the same speech she explained that this is “emergency legislation” which is being brought forward

“as quickly as possible, rather than wait … another year to do so”.

On the one hand, this is a major undertaking that, in the words of the Minister,

“cannot be switched on overnight”.—[Official Report, 4/2/26; col. 1681.]

yet at the same time it is emergency legislation that cannot wait.