← Back to House of Commons Debates
Health and Care Bill - Schedule 12 - Minor and consequential amendments
08 September 2026
Lead MP
Karin Smyth
Debate Type
Bill Debate
Tags
Parliamentary Procedure
Other Contributors: 22
At a Glance
Karin Smyth raised concerns about health and care bill - schedule 12 - minor and consequential amendments in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
I move that the clause be read a Second time, focusing on the minor and consequential amendments which are necessary to ensure the effective implementation of the Health and Care Bill. These amendments are designed to address specific issues and improve the coherence and applicability of the bill's provisions. By making these minor adjustments, we can enhance the overall quality and efficiency of health and care services.
Karin Smyth
Lab
Bristol South
The amendments proposed are essential for the effective implementation of the Health and Care Bill. They address specific issues and ensure the bill's coherence and applicability, enhancing the quality and efficiency of health and care services.
Jim Allister
TUV
North Antrim
Mr. Allister questioned the compatibility of new clause 94 with section 45B of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, expressing concern that the clause imposes export procedures that could impact intra-UK trade negatively. He sought to clarify how the licensing programme could be consistent with the Act's promise of no further export procedures impacting trade between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.
Bernard Jenkin
Con
Harwich and North Essex
Mr. Jenkin sought to intervene but the details of his intervention were not provided in the transcript.
Judith Cummins
Lab
Bradford South
Interjects on the CQC leadership conflict and the importance of maintaining public confidence in the CQC. Emphasises the importance of the Health and Social Care Safety Investigations Board (HSSIB) in providing a safe space for staff to report issues.
Grahame Morris
Lab
Easington
Supports new clauses 113 and 114, highlighting the need for a national framework of agreed metrics for radiotherapy and a review of access to radiotherapy and waiting times. Stresses the importance of cross-party consensus on health inequalities and the need to restore a world-class cancer service. Emphasises the specialist nature of radiotherapy services and the need for a dedicated workforce and physical infrastructure.
Suggests including ethnic inequalities in cancer outcomes and access to cancer treatment in the suggested review.
Tim Farron
Lib Dem
Westmorland and Lonsdale
Appreciates the points made by the hon. Member for Easington and adds that in Lancashire and south Cumbria, only 29% of cancer patients get access to radiotherapy. Emphasises the importance of treating patients within 62 days and reducing the delay in cancer treatment to improve survival chances.
Helen Morgan
Lab
Torfaen
She highlighted the risks of abolishing Healthwatch and the Health Services Safety Investigations Body, emphasising the need for an independent patient voice and whistleblowing routes. She also drew attention to the corridor care crisis, noting the unacceptable conditions and high numbers of patients treated in hospital corridors, and proposed new clause 140 to require the Government to end corridor care in NHS hospitals within one year and launch an independent inquiry.
Liz Twist
Lab
Blaydon
Welcomed the Bill and the Government’s new clauses. Emphasised the need for statutory accountability for parity of esteem between physical and mental health. Proposed new clause 159 to address a long-standing legislative omission, requiring the Secretary of State to publish national waiting time standards for mental health services within 12 months and report performance annually to Parliament.
Agrees with the hon. Member for Gosport that robust regulation is needed for reputable funeral directors to operate with integrity, compassion, and professionalism.
Stuart Andrew
Con
Pudsey
Supports the hon. Member for Gosport and mentions Donna Ockenden’s report, which highlights issues such as those in Nottingham, reinforcing the need for robust regulation in the funeral sector.
Bernard Jenkin
Con
Harwich and North Essex
Bernard Jenkin supports amendments 1 to 4 to remove the abolition of HSSIB from the Bill, criticising the Government for failing to justify removing this safety investigation function. He suspects the Government's reluctance to maintain HSSIB stems from the health system's dislike of being held accountable by an independent body.
Jeff Smith
Lab
Manchester, Withington
Jeff Smith introduces new clauses 86 and 87 to promote patient involvement and innovation in psychedelic-assisted therapy treatments involving schedule 1 controlled substances. He cites international research indicating successful treatments for PTSD, mental health issues, and end-of-life distress. Smith argues that current bureaucratic hurdles impede research and delays grant funding. He welcomes the Government's principle agreement to enable clinical research and hopes for a timeline for implementation.
Anna Sabine supports new clauses 116 and 117. Clause 116 aims to assess the availability of medical cannabis on the NHS for children, citing Clover Carkeet's case and the challenges faced by parents in securing treatment. Clause 117 seeks to address waiting times and unequal access to speech and language therapy, emphasising her personal experience with vocal cord paralysis and the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists' backing.
Mr Ramsay raised concerns about the risks of scrapping Healthwatch without a suitable alternative, citing the CEO of Healthwatch Norfolk's statement regarding the potential impact on patient safety and scrutiny of the health system.
Bernard Jenkin
Con
Harwich and North Essex
Mr Jenkin requested clarification from the Minister about the future of Healthwatch, indicating concerns over the removal of statutory functions.
Mr Van Mierlo requested clarification from the Minister on the future plans for Healthwatch, showing interest in the Government's response to the debate.
Ms Costigan thanked the Minister and expressed agreement with the Minister's assessment that the changes in the Bill would help reduce waiting lists and address corridor care issues, highlighting improvements in NHS trusts.
Ms Taylor requested further clarification from the Minister, indicating a desire to understand the Government's position more fully.
Mr Sewards questioned the Minister about the Prime Minister's commitment to regulating the funeral sector, showing concern about the timing and prioritisation of regulatory measures.
Jim Dickson, in an intervention, asked the Secretary of State about an amendment he had tabled with the Alzheimer’s Society to centralise dementia data for better early diagnosis and treatment. He sought the Secretary of State's agreement on the importance of this priority for the Government.
Damian Hinds
Con
East Hampshire
Damian Hinds welcomed the Secretary of State back to the Department and paid tribute to his predecessor. He acknowledged that the Bill contains important provisions but expressed concerns about a large IT project with no details and the removal of patient voice. He also criticised the frequent top-down reorganisation of the NHS, suggesting that past reorganisations have not solved the NHS’s problems.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.