HC Deb 14 June 1910 vol 17 cc1188-9
Mr. HENRY WALKER

asked, with reference to the doctor called in on an emergency under the statutory rules, in pursuance of the Midwives Act, and to the fact that payment is now being made to him out of the rates in some places under the Public Health Act, 1875, and in others under the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1848, whether, in the absence of any application for consent by or on behalf of the patient or her husband, such a payment out of the rates to the doctor, whether under the one Act or the other, is treated as parochial relief; whether, as a matter of fact, the patient and her husband in respect of attendance on the former of whom the doctor is thus paid under the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1848, are in some unions, but not in others, entered and classed as paupers in receipt of medical relief; whether, when the payment is made under the Public Health Act, 1875, the patient and her husband are everywhere spared from any demoralising contact with the Poor Law, and are not subjected to visits from the relieving officer; what authority in each locality decides whether the payment out of the rates to the doctor shall be made under the one Act or the other; what authority determines whether the patient and her husband in those cases in which no application or consent is made by, them or on their behalf shall or shall not be regarded as in receipt of parochial relief and be dealt with as paupers; and whether, in view of the diversity of opinion and of action among local authorities in this matter, the President of the Local Government Board will issue a circular clearing up the legal position?

The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Bums)

As I informed my hon. Friend, in answer to his question of the 28th April last, there are two or three cases in which payments of the kind referred to have been made under Section 133 of the Public Health Act, 1875. Such payments would not be parochial relief. Some Boards of Guardians have, I believe, made similar payments under Section 2 of the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1848, but I have no information as to their practice in the matter. It does not seem to me to be necessary to adopt the course suggested in the last part of the question. I may remind my hon. Friend that a Bill has been introduced on behalf of the Government, in another place, which contains a provision on this subject, and I can assure him that the points to which he has drawn attention will not be lost sight of.

Mr. H. WALKER

May I ask, with regard to the Bill introduced by the Lord President of the Council, whether the right hon. Gentleman can see his way to substitute the local supervising authority for the board of guardians as the authority.

Mr. BURNS

I have already told my hon. Friend that the point to which he has drawn attention will not be lost sight of.