Catherine Mckinnell says courts should consider NHS availability when assessing future care damages under proposed reforms
A Labour MP has launched a fresh attempt to reform how private healthcare costs are assessed in clinical negligence compensation, describing the current legal framework as a “1948 relic” that risks placing unnecessary strain on NHS finances.
Introducing a Ten Minute Rule bill in the House of Commons, Catherine McKinnell called for changes to the Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948, arguing that courts are currently prevented from taking account of the availability of NHS treatment when awarding damages for future care needs.
Speaking during a debate recorded in UK Parliament, she said this can result in compensation being calculated on the basis of private care even where treatment is ultimately delivered by the NHS, creating what she described as a form of double financial pressure on public resources.
McKinnell said reform would help ensure compensation arrangements better reflect modern healthcare delivery and allow resources to be directed more effectively across the health system.
Her proposed bill would also introduce fixed recoverable costs for certain lower-value clinical negligence claims and require periodic reviews of the limits applied to such cases. It further calls for consideration of alternative approaches to compensation in obstetric claims, which account for a significant proportion of high-value liabilities.
However, claimant representatives warned that changing the 1948 framework could have serious consequences for injured patients.
The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers said polling it commissioned found that 51% of UK adults believe claimants should receive compensation based on the cost of private treatment, compared with 35% who opposed that approach.
APIL also said only around 4% of clinical negligence damages spending relates to therapy and treatment, with the majority covering losses such as long-term social care and other needs that would not be affected by any amendment to the legislation.
Its vice-president, Guy Forster, warned that reforming the 1948 Act would do little to reduce overall costs while risking serious consequences for injured people.
“Not only would it be deeply damaging and unfair for victims of negligence, but there would be detrimental unintended consequences for the NHS itself,” he said.
He added that access to rehabilitation after serious injury already varies significantly across the country and that appropriate therapy could be critical to maintaining quality of life.
Forster also argued that restricting compensation based on private care costs could force some patients back into treatment systems connected to the original harm.
“Some people need care for the rest of their lives and should not be at the mercy of the system which let them down,” he said