Member

Amendment 483C, another amendment tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Coffey, proposes that where the co-ordinating doctor is ill and the panel is satisfied with his evidence, it should be able to deal with deal with it without hearing from him—I did not put that clearly. Currently the position is that if the co-ordinating doctor is ill—that is, there is a medical reason why he cannot appear—it is open to the panel to decide exceptionally that it does not need to hear from him because it must normally hear from him. In my view, there should be that exception because there will be occasions when the panel is completely satisfied with, for example, a report from the co-ordinating doctor that is corroborated by an independent doctor from whom they have heard. If the panel is completely satisfied, should the patient have to wait until there can be a personal hearing with the co-ordinating doctor? In my view, no. I am not in favour of that amendment.