Debates between Lord Cormack and Lord Markham during the 2019 Parliament

General Medical Council: Internal Guidance

Debate between Lord Cormack and Lord Markham
Tuesday 17th October 2023

(6 months, 2 weeks ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Markham Portrait Lord Markham (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I absolutely agree. That is why, as I say, we could not be firmer in saying we want to make sure it is very clear in the NHS Constitution that we are referring to women as women—that has to be the absolute primary descriptor—and men as men. We could not be clearer on that, and I am very happy to take that up across government as well.

--- Later in debate ---
Lord Cormack Portrait Lord Cormack (Con)
- Hansard - -

I am most grateful. Would my noble friend on the Front Bench take the opportunity to pay tribute to the heroism—I use the word deliberately —of JK Rowling and those like her who have spoken out so passionately and so often? What the noble Baroness, Lady Hayter, said, we should all echo to the rafters.

Lord Markham Portrait Lord Markham (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I completely agree. I believe that, more than anything in society, we have to be tolerant of people and their ability to have free speech and express their views freely. I think we have all seen circumstances where people feel intimidated in expressing what they feel is right, particularly in this circumstance of stating clearly when a woman is a woman and when a man is a man.

Folic Acid Fortification

Debate between Lord Cormack and Lord Markham
Tuesday 25th July 2023

(9 months, 1 week ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Markham Portrait Lord Markham (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I first thank the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, for his tireless and passionate campaigning on this issue, which he is right to do. As I have learned, the situation is complex. We had 369 consultation responses, and more than 13,000 different SKU items—products containing flour—will be affected. We are not just talking about bread; pizza, lasagne, cakes and sauces are all affected, so you have to change the labelling of all those. We are trying to bring them all on board in a sensible manner, and to get this right quickly. We believe that a lot of people will voluntarily take this up much quicker. When you are talking about changing labels on the 22 billion items that are sold each year, you obviously need to look at how to do that practically and within a reasonable timeframe.

Lord Cormack Portrait Lord Cormack (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, my noble friend was right to acknowledge the indefatigable campaigning of the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, but will he please not rely upon these government phrases “shortly”, “in due course” and “soon”? Perhaps he could tell us which of those comes first. We feel that we are being fobbed off and that the delay is inordinate. He talked about early 2024, but will it really be early 2024? According to me, January is early 2024.

Lord Markham Portrait Lord Markham (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my noble friend, and I agree. I hate the words “in due course” because they mean “whenever”. While I freely admit to using words such as “soon” and “imminent”, “in due course” is not a term I use, and I understand the point being made. The consultation will be published late in the summer. It is a complex area, and I have said that I want to get personally involved now; I want to make sure that we get the balance right between the many competing interests. The legislation is planned for early 2024. All I can do on my side is to undertake to push that forward as much as possible.

Invasive Group A Streptococcus and Scarlet Fever

Debate between Lord Cormack and Lord Markham
Monday 5th December 2022

(1 year, 4 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Markham Portrait Lord Markham (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

All I can say on that is that, clearly, that is not acceptable and we need a situation where it can, and that is why we should have inspectors. If we are using 111 as a backbone service, as we are in this case, it is vital that people are getting proper advice. By the way, I see a lot of that, and it is something that I am personally involved in now, as well as using it digitally—a lot of these things can be done through the use of the apps and so on—but, clearly, we need to make sure the advice people get is sound.

Lord Cormack Portrait Lord Cormack (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

If a parent has not had a response from 111 within an hour, should they not then ring 999?

Lord Markham Portrait Lord Markham (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I would advise—and again this is personal advice—that, if they have not got a response and they are concerned about their child, it is probably better and quicker for them to drive, if they are able to. Clearly, if there is a 999 ambulance response because they cannot get to the hospital quickly, then that is a fallback, but if they are able to drive with their child and they are concerned in that way, my advice would always be to go for safety first in this. Again, as a parent of a four year-old and seeing the chatter on social media over the weekend, I know this is an area of concern. Clearly, we need to make sure that reassurance is there for everyone.