Could David Owen kill the NHS bill?
Health minister warns that Owen's amendment could prove fatal to the government's reforms.
By George Eaton Published 11 October 2011 16:28
While Westminster has been Fox hunting, the dispute over the government's NHS reforms has quietly restarted. The House of Lords began debating the Health and Social Care Bill today and a vote will be held tomorrow. While there is little prospect of the bill being voted down, ministers are concerned that an important amendment tabled by former SDP leader David Owen and the constitutionalist Peter Hennessy could pass.
The amendment is calling for the whole of part three of the bill - the section relating to competition in the NHS - to be referred to a special select committee for further scrutiny. Significantly, as the FT's Kiran Stacey notes, some ministers fear that the amendment could kill off the entire bill. In a letter to peers before today's debate, Richard Howe, a health minister, warned that the "potential for slippage in the timetable carries grave implications for the government's ability to achieve royal assent for the bill by the end of the session. The bill cannot be carried over from this session to the next.
"The House must have proper time to examine the bill but the proposal put forward by Lord Owen could result in delay, which could well prove fatal to it. This is not a risk that I believe this House should take." Under the terms of the amendment, the special committee would report back by 19 December.
Owen has warned that the bill will allow the Health Secretary to "abdicate from all responsibility for the provision as well as the promotion of health-care." In an an article for the NS earlier this year, he previously declared that the Lib Dems would no longer be "the heirs of Beveridge" if they failed to halt or "at the very least, slow down" the reforms.
Labour is likely to vote en masse for the amendment, leaving Owen and Hennessy with around 80 additional votes to win.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















4 comments
I should be careful about being too optimistic about Owen's amendment killing the Bill. It has set and distinct time line and would come back before the House by end of February. Plenty of time for vote to take place. Check out his site
Yet another of my comments “appears to be spam”, so, not for the first time, I am going to have to divert people elsewhere, in this case to a blog post saying the same and several further things - http://davidaslindsay.blogspot.com/2011/10/thirty-years-on.html
Hope so.
This bill is nothing but a sleepwalk to privatisation. An NHS delivered by Quangos, you know thelikes of the Blair and the Tories Pals in the long run.
Funny how Cherie, a Judge has suddenly diversified into Private Health Care. And people wonder why Blair was booed at conference. It is sickening
Tories, you are put on notice. We will never accept the American model.
One of our number informed us that an aunt of his who had recently passed away and whose estate he was managing had run up a vet's bill of £2000 plus in her last year.
She owned a small Chinese breed of dog[ not a Peke ] and if there is such a thing, a common-or-garden cat,
The dog had had a by-pass and medications whilst the cat had no more than routine treatment.
The vet company were normally paid up front but had allowed several hundred pounds credit.
They had to get in line with the aunt's other creditors.
A few random enquiries unearthed quite a few similar stories.
The insurance companies' agreements are also not devoid of loopholes.
And vet's seem to have bottomless hope that their treatment will be successful. There is no such thing as terminal.
Several acquaintances[humans] seeking private hospital care to rectify a 'botched' operation were horrified to see the surgeon who had carried out the original op lauded as a very senior medico on the select hospital's list of staff.
One such unfortunate had an appendix removed by and NHS 'surgeon' but following the second op discovered the intestines had not been replaced correctly.
The junior surgeon who remedied the problem denigrated NHS standards blissfully unaware of the fact that his boss had performed the original act of 'butchery'
Dr Owen did for the Liberals and the Labour Party at one fell stoke. How is that for surgery?
Euthanesia