8. Debate: Stage 4 of the National Health Service (Indemnities) (Wales) Bill

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 5:18 pm on 14 January 2020.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Vaughan Gething Vaughan Gething Labour 5:18, 14 January 2020

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you to Members for their additional questions and contributions today. I'm delighted to see that, again, the purpose and the point of the Bill still enjoys support across the Chamber.

To deal with the points raised by Helen Mary Jones and Angela Burns, I want to give a proper assurance that, in terms of how to measure success—well, success means more than one thing. It's about the financial underpinning of what's going on, about the cost to the public purse, but it's also about the quality of the service from the person who's providing that professional healthcare service. It's also about what that means for the person that they're seeing, treating and working with as well, so I don't think it's as simple as saying that there is a measure. And to be fair, Helen Mary Jones recognised that in part of her contribution as well.

And I don't see a conflict between the duty of candour that we seek to introduce and the operation of this scheme, because, actually, the duty of candour doesn't change the fact of the reality of liability or otherwise. So, we would still want medical professionals to fully engage with the duty of candour, as indeed their representative bodies want them to as well; there's not been any suggestion that they don't want to do that, or that that should somehow affect the way in which liability decisions are or aren't made. And on that, dealing with the points that Angela Burns raised, no GP in Wales should feel or believe, or have any reasonable cause to believe, that there is going to be a diminution in the quality of service or, indeed, protection, either compared to their colleagues in England or elsewhere. They should draw confidence from the operators of the risk pool and the way that their colleagues in secondary care have been dealt with. This isn't just about protecting NHS trusts, or the fact, as you mentioned, about individuals and their own standing within the profession, the potential for regulatory action, or, indeed, the investigations by law enforcement agents that we've seen. They have all taken place within the context of hospital-based care, and it's part of the confidence that a range of actors have about the choice to be made about who will now go on to operate the scheme, that there is a successful record of understanding the context in which healthcare is delivered, and the different risks and challenges that healthcare professionals face, and in this case in particular, of course, general practitioners.

We'll continue to work with stakeholders, including, of course, the British Medical Association and the Royal College of General Practitioners, not just in their overall support for the Bill or in the draft of regulations, but as we do bring those forward to hopefully be approved and in place. So, I'm happy to give those commitments, to continue to work with stakeholders, and to fully provide all the detail we could and should do to this place for further scrutiny in the future.