By BBC political editor Robin Oakley

The government faces a lively week. Ministers will have to continue fighting off the growing public perception of a crisis in the National Health Service, which they have done insufficient to address.

But they are also risking defeat in the Lords on Thursday over the Criminal Justice (Mode of Trial) Bill which restricts the right to jury trials.

They will also have to begin responding to the Royal Commission on reform of the House of Lords which publishes its report on Thursday.

They will face criticism over their efforts to allow two Sinn Fein MPs to use the facilities of the House of Commons without taking the oath of allegiance to the Queen.

And with the seven day period for representations running out this week the home secretary will face further ructions over the extradition case against Senator Pinochet and about his readiness to waive immigration rules to permit the entry of the convicted rapist, heavyweight boxer Mike Tyson.

The health crisis

This is a compound of long term funding problems and short term public relations mismanagement.

But there is no underestimating its political importance. Health is right at the top of the agenda for most people in considering their vote at a general election.

The Health Service used to be an automatic plus for Labour in political terms through eighteen years of opposition.

After all, Labour founded the NHS. The famous "Maples memo" on Tory strategy once suggested that the best hope for the Conservatives was having health mentioned as little as possible.

But Labour are finding the going much harder in government and there is real scepticism now about all their pre-election promises to make dramatic improvements in the Health Service.

Certainly there have been some improvements. Increased funds are going into cancer care. NHS Direct is helping to ease some pressure on GPs.

But while there may have been some progress in cutting waiting lists for operations there has been a big increase in waiting lists to see a consultant in the first place.

One problem is that for a long time less has been spent on health in Britain than in other European countries.

At present it is 6.7% of spending, although the prime minister has now promised to raise it to the Continental average of 7.9% by 2006.

Spending to stand still

Another is that with improvements in medical science and an ageing population demand on the NHS is increasing fast.

And "medical inflation" with the cost of drugs and so on tends to run well ahead of ordinary inflation.

Much money has to be spent simply to stand still, and there the government is a victim of its own tendency to over-sell and re-sell.

For 18 months ministers have been banging on about the extra £21bn being spent on the NHS.

Improvements yet to show

But that money will only start to come on stream from April of this year and there has been little chance for its effects to show.

It has to cover inflationary increases in costs and it is not a single year increase but is to be spread over three years. And it followed two years of tight controls on spending.

People hear about the huge sum but see little to show for it in their own areas and are disillusioned. To many there is no significant, visible change from the Tory years which New Labour told them before the election were such a disgrace.

In one recent poll only 8% perceived an improvement in the NHS under Labour.

Two other presentational blunders have weakened the government's position. When ministers decided to focus heavily on the flu epidemic they thought that would be accepted as an excuse for failings elsewhere in the system: instead it merely drew attention to them and created a general air of crisis.

Secondly, the heavy-handed response to the criticisms from Lord Winston gave the impression that the government had something to hide on the NHS.

Finding more resources

The prime minister has already conceded to William Hague at Question Time that there is "suffering" in the NHS and has taken to pleading for time to solve the problems.

The question for the government is: what can be done both to end the public perception of a crisis and to meet expectations on the NHS?

The first answer is to find more resources, and the prime minister has hinted they will be found.

It could be done by imposing charges, by bringing in a compulsory health insurance scheme, by stimulating more private medicine, or by increasing government spending on health.

But the first three options have already been publicly rejected by this government and would be politically dangerous for Tony Blair and his team to attempt.

But because Labour, in search of the label of economic responsibility, has joined the Tories in recent years in trying to pretend that the state can provide ever-better services while cutting taxes more and more, the increased spending option is difficult too.

The chancellor has already promised a 1p cut in income tax from April this year and considerable face would be lost if he were to reverse that now, as the Liberal Democrats have been urging him to do, and to spend the money instead on boosting health service spending.

The right to jury trial

The government is likely to be in serious trouble on Thursday over its Criminal Justice (Mode of Trial) Bill that would remove the automatic right to jury trial on such middle rank offences as burglary.

The government, in the shape of the home secretary, is simultaneously attacking opponents of the measure as woolly-minded liberals and the forces of small 'c' conservatism but many lawyers are horrified at what they see as a crucial breach of human rights. In particular they fear it will tend to penalise black defendants.

Trial of strength

Mr Straw, who opposed the idea of restricting jury trials when Labour was in opposition, now argues that only about 18,000 people a year would be affected out of the 1.8 million charged with offences.

He adds that the change giving magistrates the power to decide whether a defendant should be judged by a judge and jury is needed to "modernise" and speed up the criminal justice system.

With many lawyers in the part-reformed Upper House, the issue will be an interesting trial of strength, with nobody quite certain of the arithmetic at this stage.

A cross-party coalition, led by Lord Ackner and Lady Helena Kennedy has tabled an amendment which would in effect wreck the Bill at committee stage in the Lords.

Peers deny that they are bound to let the legislation pass to the Commons as a "manifesto" measure because Labour at the time of the last election in 1997 did not approve of restricting jury trials, however much it may be committed to modernising the system.

Because the bill has begun its parliamentary life in the Lords the peers would not be rejecting something which was already the expressed will of elected MPs, having been whipped through the Commons, and also because it has started in the Lords the government cannot use the Parliament Act powers to drive it through in a year even if the peers do reject the bill.

Sinn Fein at Westminster

As part of what the Government calls the "normalisation" process following the admission of Sinn Fein to the Northern Ireland Executive the government is to move this week to provide for Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness to be able to use the facilities of the Commons.

Although the two MPs will still not be allowed to sit in the Commons chamber, for that they would have to swear the oath of allegiance to the Queen. Neither are they able to draw a Commons salary.

End of a boycott

For their part, the two Sinn Fein MPs would be making a symbolic gesture in ending a 95-year boycott of Westminster.

The two Sinn Fein MPs would be made eligible for free travel to and from Westminster and for upwards of £50,000 each to set up offices at Westminster.

The government believes that it will be to the benefit of all MPs for the Sinn Fein representatives to circulate at Westminster.

Ministers hope it will help to develop Sinn Fein as a democratic party committed to peaceful means and that the gesture will help persuade the IRA to decommission its weapons but Tories are opposing the moves, which were condemned when first mooted by former Conservative leader John Major.

After the last election the Speaker refused to allow the compromise measure in respect of the two Sinn Fein MPs, ruling that they should not enjoy other privileges while refusing to take the oath and sit in the chamber.