"The NHS will last as long as there are folk left with the faith to fight for it"
Aneurin Bevan

Thursday, 31 March 2011

Is this the right way to make laws?

One thing that really pisses off residents in an area is when a large company builds a hideous facility and then applies retrospectively for planning permission. Yet this is happening to the Health and Social Care Bill.

Is it right to implement a law before it has been approved by Parliament and then say that the law must be passed because it has already been implemented? Pulse reports that the government will make amendments to the Bill in the Lords but "the principles remain the same, as does the clear direction set out by the reforms". The magazine quotes Dr James Kingsland, special adviser on commissioning at the Department of Health, who said that:
Government advisers were calling for more communication with GPs on the ground, rather than for much tinkering with the bill itself
So we should not expect any real changes to the Bill. Further they quote a source saying:

"What isn’t going to happen is some sort of rowing back. There are not going to be major changes to the reforms. The horse has already bolted on that one. We’ve already got more than two thirds of the country covered by pathfinders. We’re beyond the tipping point."
Is this the right way to make laws? Don't the public have a recourse against a government acting in such a thoroughly undemocratic way?

1 comment:

  1. This pisses me off too. It's like intimidation and is certainly not democracy. What sort of message does it send to implement it before it's voted into law - 'we'll do what we want regardless of whether it's legal'?
    They should not be allowed to start implementing anything unless and until it's been voted on and made law.