It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Edward. I congratulate the right hon. Member for Haltemprice and Howden on promoting his private Member’s Bill. As somebody who successfully steered a private Member’s Bill on to the statute book in the 2009-10 Session, I know how proud a moment it can be to make just a small change in legislation that nevertheless helps whatever cause a Member takes up. I also had a private Member’s Bill in the 2013-14 Session, which sadly did not get past Second Reading. That is just the luck of the draw. I very much appreciate the right hon. Gentleman’s bipartisan approach because his Bill makes a great deal of common sense.

Hon. Members from all parties will have had cases in the time that they have been Members of Parliament where they have had to refer constituents’ treatment in the NHS to the parliamentary and health service ombudsmen. They will also have had cases that have taken a great deal of time—often a lot longer than 12 months. In the interests of accountability and transparency, the sensible changes that the right hon. Gentleman proposes in the Bill make a great deal of sense because they allow the public to see the amount of work that the ombudsman has to do in a 12-month period and how many of those cases take longer than 12 months to reach some kind of conclusion and resolution. In terms of accountability to Parliament and to the public outside, that is an important change. It is a small change, but one that will make a great deal of difference to the work of the ombudsman and to confidence in the ombudsman.

I will press the right hon. Gentleman on a couple of points, which I hope he will answer in closing. First, on 31 March 2013, the ombudsman had a maximum of 30 NHS complaints that it had not concluded within 12 months. No figure was given in the annual report for 2013-14. Can he explain a bit more about why he thinks there has been a delay and why he thinks the key issue is lack of communication with the complainants? I suspect  that we will reach the same conclusion, but I would like to tease out of him why he thinks the measure will work.

One thing is clear: when the ombudsman falls short, it is essential that it is open and transparent. An annual report setting out the details of how long investigations and complaints have taken to be concluded is welcome. That is why the Opposition will back the right hon. Gentleman’s Bill today.

I note that some have called for much wider changes to the ombudsman service, including proposals for different scrutiny arrangements that would make it easier for Parliament to hold public services to account. That is not really in the scope of the Bill or why we are here, but it is interesting, because it comes on to some of the underlying concerns that the right hon. Gentleman expressed in moving clause 1. I understand that the Cabinet Office is committed to carrying out a review of the ombudsman landscape. The Opposition look forward to the outcome of that review. With the indulgence of the Committee, perhaps the Minister, when he responds to the debate, will update us on whether that review has begun and what its scope is or will be. That will help shape the way that the Bill is introduced.

The right hon. Gentleman has already indicated that he may move the amendments on Report, and the Opposition will look at them with real interest. If anything can sharpen the Bill further, we will support it. I look forward to hearing answers from the right hon. Gentleman and the Minister.