Received this today: As I have said before, I think it makes little difference to our cases as, presumably, we can use the 1977 Act. But perhaps it clears-up a disagreement.

Steve: as suggested by a number of people here (and I thought agreed by you) could you now amend the Forum heading to reflect this change?

Best wishes to all.

maryjo

Dear (maryjo)

Thank you for your correspondence of 29 November to Andrew Lansley about the ‘National Health Service (NHS) Act 1946’. I have been asked to reply on his behalf.

In your email, you ask for information on the NHS Act 1946. It may be helpful if I clarify that the NHS Act 1946 was repealed, by the NHS Act 1977.

All subsequent Acts can be repealed by the ‘ Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1969’. The legislation.gov website gives the following definition for this Act “An Act to promote the reform of the statute law by the repeal, in accordance with recommendations of the Law Commission, of certain enactments which (except in so far as their effect is preserved) are no longer of practical utility, and by making other provision in connection with the repeal of those enactments”.

Both the NHS Acts for 1946 and 1977 are available online at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/.

Further information on the history of the NHS is available on the NHS Evidence website at www.library.nhs.uk

I hope this reply is helpful.

Yours sincerely,

Priya Bassan
Customer Service Centre
Department of Health

maryjo wrote:Received this today: As I have said before, I think it makes little difference to our cases as, presumably, we can use the 1977 Act. But perhaps it clears-up a disagreement.

Steve: as suggested by a number of people here (and I thought agreed by you) could you now amend the Forum heading to reflect this change?

Best wishes to all.

maryjo

Dear (maryjo)

Thank you for your correspondence of 29 November to Andrew Lansley about the ‘National Health Service (NHS) Act 1946’. I have been asked to reply on his behalf.

In your email, you ask for information on the NHS Act 1946. It may be helpful if I clarify that the NHS Act 1946 was repealed, by the NHS Act 1977.

All subsequent Acts can be repealed by the ‘ Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1969’. The legislation.gov website gives the following definition for this Act “An Act to promote the reform of the statute law by the repeal, in accordance with recommendations of the Law Commission, of certain enactments which (except in so far as their effect is preserved) are no longer of practical utility, and by making other provision in connection with the repeal of those enactments”.

Both the NHS Acts for 1946 and 1977 are available online at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/.

Further information on the history of the NHS is available on the NHS Evidence website at www.library.nhs.uk

I hope this reply is helpful.

Yours sincerely,

Priya Bassan
Customer Service Centre
Department of Health

Hi, maryjo

Not meaning any offence, but i would take the reply you got from Priya Bassan Customer Service Centre Department of Health, With a pinch of salt, I have never heard of this before where customer care for the N.H.S reply's on behalf of the secretary of state for health, It should be Lord Earl who replys on behalf of the secretary of state for health. And not some customer care person from the N.H.S, I am not convinced by the reply you have posted here as we all know how the N.H.S Love to mislead (LIE)

I also notice that in the reply you got it stated that the NHS Act 1946 was repealed, by the NHS Act 1977. They forgot to tell you that the 1977 Health Act was Repealed by the 2006 Health Act, Thus great confusion still reignes

Maryjo I would ask you to write again to Mr Andrew lansley or Lord Earl Directly for a reply with a minister's signiture attached to validate any repeals to the N.H.S Act 1946

Just my thoughts on the subject Another thought that comes to mind How did Ms Pam coughlan win her case against the N.H.S Useing Parts of the 1946 National Health Act If it was Repealed in 1977???

Mick

Hi Mick

Thanks. I asked a specific question of The Secretary of State - and feel I got a strait reply 'on his behalf' (perhaps a half-reply, as you suggest). That seems good enough to me and I really don't want to spend more time on it.

I agree that your Coughlan question appears to remain - and, of course, I do not know the answer.

As I've said, I don't think it makes any difference - quote one, quote them all!

All the best

maryjo

The 1977 act was repealed and replaced by the 2006 act but throughout the core principles have remained unchanged to this day (and incidentally were not affected by the 'NHS and Community Care act 1990') If the core principles of the 1946 act were not enshrined in the 1977 act then 'Coughlan' (1998 and 1999) would not have happened! As I posted earlier:
Questions regarding possible abolition of the NHS are irrelevant when in fact the crucial question is 'what will replace it' if any party dared to abolish it? However the question is not pertinent to THIS forum the purpose of which is to ensure that the founding principles of the NHS are maintained and applied whatever changes may be made to the structure of the organisation itself.
The NHS confirm on their own website and in their constitution that they contine to uphold the founding principles of the NHS act. They say that they "hold a continuing commitment to the founding principles of the NHS which can be summed up as The provision of quality care that meets the needs of everyone : Is free at the point of need and is based on a patient's clinical need not on their ability to pay" Anyone who wishes to confirm the founding principles need only visit:

http://www.nhs.uk/aboutnhs/CorePrinciples/Pages/NHSCorePrinciples.aspx

As I have stated many times, this service is NOT FREE because it is funded from general taxation and is the statutory right of all citizens because the NHS was established by act of parliament. Check the NHS constitution here:

http://www.nhs.uk/choiceintheNHS/Rightsandpledges/NHSConstitution/Documents/nhs-constitution-interactive-version-march-2010.pdf

The National Health Service Act, 1946 states:
'Part 1.- (2) The services so provided shall be free of charge, except where any provision of this Act expressly provides for the making and recovery of charges.'

The National Health Service Act 2006 states:
'1 (3)The services so provided must be free of charge except in so far as the making and recovery of charges is expressly provided for by or under any enactment, whenever passed.

In fact at no time has any enactment been passed for charges for nursing services to be levied by the NHS. The NHS can charge private patients treated in NHS hospitals and for dental and ophthalmic services etc. The scam of course is to 'redefine health care as social care' and thereby shunt all care costs on to social services by claiming that the primary need is for accommodation, not nursing care. As we all know where the need for accommodation arises as a consequence of an illness or disability thus enabling 'health needs' to be addressed then the primary need is for nursing care - NOT for accommodation - just as it is on a normal hospital ward.

Note particularly the words 'is expressly provided for by or under any enactment' which ensures that the imposition of charges for nursing care require due parliamentary process to implement and cannot be levied by NHS minions or even ministers simply to save money! Steve.

Hello Mick,

The Department of Health and the NHS are not one and the same thing. The Sec of State for Health aka A Lansley is the overall control factor where government decisions about Health Matters are concerned, and beneath him are a whole bunch of Ministers, Junior Ministers and so on. Each one of them is responsible for their actions to the Sec of State for Health.

They are not the NHS. They are government.

The NHS comes below the hierarchy of departments, and is not part of government as such. So maryjo's reply didn't come from the NHS - it came from the Department of Health.

You could work as a Nurse or as a Hospital Porter for the NHS but that doesn't make you a direct employee of the government/ minister/sec of state/junior and so on. It's all done by delegation of responsibilites.

So it's almost along the lines of the 'thigh bone is connected to the .... bone' and the '.... bone is connected to the .... bone' and so on.

I've written to my MP umpteen times about this-and-that, and at first I received replies from his Staff. Not all of those replies were helpful, so I blasted the staff at the time. Then my MP started to reply direct ......... or did he? I will never know whether he wrote the letters/emails or anything else ....... all he was required to do was to add his 'squiggle' signature. But whether he ever wrote the content is almost irrelevant. He delegated ... so he is responsible via his squiggle on the bottom!

I've had a very similar reply to my own requests for confirmation that the 1946 NHS Act has indeed been repealed.

There is no doubt about it. The 1946 was repealed by the 1977 which was then repealed by the 2006. (Until proven otherwise by someone on the forum, but they will have a struggle to prove otherwise.)

As for Pam Coughlan's case, Mick, I've already posted elsewhere about the fact that Coughlan did not rely on the 1946. All you need to do is to search within Coughlan for 1946. Then search for 1977 .... compare and contrast. (You won't find 2006 so don't waste effort there!!)

Look after yourself, Mick!

VM

patrick11 wrote:[
Just my thoughts on the subject Another thought that comes to mind How did Ms Pam coughlan win her case against the N.H.S Useing Parts of the 1946 National Health Act If it was Repealed in 1977???

Mick

I just wish to say that this has also been my stance all along in attempting to answer some of the "encounters" I have had to face recently and I hope that everyone understands this.

FinnMickey wrote:

patrick11 wrote:[
Just my thoughts on the subject Another thought that comes to mind How did Ms Pam coughlan win her case against the N.H.S Useing Parts of the 1946 National Health Act If it was Repealed in 1977???

Mick

I just wish to say that this has also been my stance all along in attempting to answer some of the "encounters" I have had to face recently and I hope that everyone understands this.

Seems to me that Steve answered this point above.

steve wrote

The National Health Service Act, 1946 states:
'Part 1.- (2) The services so provided shall be free of charge, except where any provision of this Act expressly provides for the making and recovery of charges.'

The National Health Service Act 2006 states:
'1 (3)The services so provided must be free of charge except in so far as the making and recovery of charges is expressly provided for by or under any enactment, whenever passed.

In fact at no time has any enactment been passed for charges for nursing services to be levied by the NHS. The NHS can charge private patients treated in NHS hospitals and for dental and ophthalmic services etc. The scam of course is to 'redefine health care as social care' and thereby shunt all care costs on to social services by claiming that the primary need is for accommodation, not nursing care. As we all know where the need for accommodation arises as a consequence of an illness or disability thus enabling 'health needs' to be addressed then the primary need is for nursing care - NOT for accommodation - just as it is on a normal hospital ward.

Note particularly the words 'is expressly provided for by or under any enactment' which ensures that the imposition of charges for nursing care require due parliamentary process to implement and cannot be levied by NHS minions or even ministers simply to save money! Steve.

The National Health Service Act, 1946 states:
'Part 1.- (2) The services so provided shall be free of charge, except where any provision of this Act expressly provides for the making and recovery of charges.'



This being the predominent factor of the 1946 National Health act, no enactment has ever been passed to charge for health care. I do beleive that the 1977 Helth act contained simular Wording. Untill any inactment (LAW) is passed To charge for health care. only then can it be said that the 1946 Health Act is repealed in it's Entirety, whilst the Predominent Core princibles are still in place I,E The 1946/8 core princibles of our N.H.S

The 1946 National Health Act every british citizen is entitled to Free Health care at the point of need.The services so provided shall be free of charge, except where any provision of this Act expressly provides for the making and recovery of charges

The core princibles are still the same to this day


Mick

Hello Mick

Thats a very good answer and one that equates the basic core principle of the NHS with section 1 of the 1948 Health Act which as you correctly state as not been repealed but incorporated into section 1 of the 1977 NHS Act and the NHS of 2006.

We need to undermine the NHS game plan of passing cases onto the Social Services.
It is the NHSs responsibility to fund and the DOH to ensure that they do so in accordance with law.

Dont know if I am right but it appears to me that The National Assistance Act 1948 was never in its spirit meant to be used in this manner. They are both part of the Welfare State but they are two separate areas of it.

National Assistance was meant to be given to those individuals who did not have the means to make their own way in life and if that meant accommodation then that was also provided, providing they did not have the means to pay for it and or make a small contribution to it.

It was never intended to be imployed as a weapon against those individuals who had the means because for that reason they wouldnt fall into the National Assitance category.

The assumption was that health care and treatment ( and health care meaning whatever accommodation that entailed ) was the full responsibility of the NHS and was to be provided free at the point of need regardless of the ability to pay.

The situation we now have where the NHS pass people onto the social services was not in the minds of those individuals who made this bill.

The National Assistance Act was for those people who could not make any contribution to the welfare state.

Kind regards Ian