§ 38. Captain LOSEBYasked the Minister of Health, in connection with a Departmental Committee which was recently set up to inquire into and report upon the charges made against asylum administration by Dr. Lomax, in a book entitled "The Experiences of an Asylum Doctor," whether he is aware that Dr. Lomax has expressed his unwillingness to give evidence before this Departmental Committee upon the alleged grounds that it is so constituted as to render difficult an impartial verdict, and notably because one member of the Committee has openly and publicly prejudged the issue and because all of the members are representative of the system criticised; that the National Asylum Workers' Union has refused to allow its members to give evidence upon the same on similar grounds; that the terms of reference are such as to shut out a, mass of evidence corroborating or refuting the charges made in the book; that the Committee has no power to administer an oath, pay the expenses of witnesses properly called, or protect witnesses when called; that charges similar to the charges made by Dr. Lomax are being repeated almost daily by responsible persons in the public Press; that some 6,000 ex-service men are being detained under the system thus openly attacked; and that Dr. Lomax and other persons have expressed their anxiety to give evidence before any impartial and disinterested tribunal; and whether, in view of the widespread public anxiety that the actual facts should be elucidated, he will advise the setting up of a Royal Commission, with wide powers of investigation and report, upon which true House of Commons is adequately represented?
§ 60. Mr. MILLSasked the Minister of Health whether, in view of the difficulties which have arisen in connection with the departmental committee of inquiry into the treatment of asylum patients and of the refusal of the National Asylum Workers' Union to elect a representative because, in their opinion, the terms of reference exclude material evidence and fail to protect witnesses, he will consider the appointment of a Royal Commission to explore the whole problem and the future treatment of all types of mental disorder?
§ Sir A. MONDThe question of the appointment of a Royal Commission on the point raised by my hon. Friends is under my consideration. I would, however, point out that it would necessarily involve a long delay before any practical steps could be taken, and postpone reforms which, by general agreement, might, I hope, be introduced at an early date. In view of the necessity for an expeditious investigation into the allegations made by Dr. Lomax, I have appointed a Departmental Committee. As regards the personnel of the Committee, I am informed that neither of the medical members is or has been associated with any asylum maintained out of public funds, nor is it correct to say that the Chairman is in any sense a representative of the system criticised. I fear it is impossible for me to obtain the services of any expert who has not already shown interest in Dr. Lomax's criticisms. I regret that Dr. Lomax is not prepared to substantiate before the Committee the charges which he has publicly made, and that the National Asylum Workers' Union have refused to defend their members against Dr. Lomax's charges; but I cannot admit that either he or they are entitled to dictate the composition of any tribunal of inquiry on the issues raised, for the appointment of which I am solely responsible.
§ Captain LOSEBYIs it not a fact that one member of the tribunal has openly and publicly delivered a slashing attack upon Dr. Lomax and his book, long before the investigation; is it not a fact that Dr. Lomax has made a terrible indictment against a system rather than against men; does the right hon. Gentleman not think that Dr. Lomax and others have put up a sufficiently strong primâ facie case to warrant a tribunal of transparent impartiality?
§ Sir A. MONDI cannot accept the last part of the hon. and gallant Gentleman's question. The tribunal is quite impartial. Dr. Lomax has now an opportunity of substantiating his charges. He made very serious allegations about a certain institution which, I considered, required immediate investigation, and I have appointed very competent people to investigate them. It is now for Dr. Lomax to try to substantiate his charges, or withdraw them.
§ Mr. MILLSWill the Minister of Health qualify the condemnation of the Asylum Workers' Union by saying that the refusal was due to certain limitations upon their members?
§ Sir A. MONDI said that I regretted that they refused to appear and give evidence.
§ Sir A. MONDThe reason put to me was that they wanted a representative on the Committee. Considering that they are the people who are mainly attacked by Dr. Lomax in this matter, it, obviously, would not be proper to put them, the defendants, on the Committee. In the interests of the members, I should have thought it was their duty to come forward to clear their members.
§ Captain LOSEBYMay I press my right hon. Friend for an answer to my question, as to whether it has come within his knowledge that one member of the tribunal has openly attacked Dr. Lomax in advance of the investigation, and if he finds that is the case will he substitute for this particular gentleman someone else?
§ Sir A. MONDI see no reason for making the alteration suggested.
§ 63. Mr. R. RICHARDSONasked the Minister of Health whether, in the recent conference between the Lunacy Board of control and lunacy officials in regard to the administration of the Statute, any decision was arrived at as to taking steps to acquaint the next-of-kin of ex-service men with their rights in regard to the discharge of private patients and also as to the urgency of posting up Section 79 of the Act in the waiting-rooms of asylums with a view to informing the relatives of pauper patients of the rights conferred upon them by the Statute.
§ Sir A. MONDSince 1st January last the Board of Control have adopted the practice of sending a circular to the next-of-kin of ex-service men immediately on receiving a notice of transfer to the service class, setting out the provisions of Sections 72–74 of the Lunacy Act, 1890, as to discharge of private patients. In regard to the latter part of the question, all asylum authorities have been requested to set out the effect of Section 79 of the Act in the Regulations as to 1000 Visitation which are sent to friends of patients. This the Board consider preferable to putting up a notice in the waiting-room.
§ Captain LOSEBYHas the right hon. Gentleman not had some trouble with the next-of-kin who took advantage of that, and are, in consequence, deprived of training allowances and sometimes of a portion of their pension?
§ Sir A. MONDI have had no notice of this question in my Department.