HC Deb 03 May 1955 vol 540 cc1514-9
Mrs. Castle

(by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Health whether he has considered the evidence sent to him by the hon. Member for Blackburn, East of pressure being brought to bear on doctors by local Conservative Associations to send them the names and addresses of their sick, blind and aged patients for the purposes of the postal vote, and whether he will instruct doctors in the National Health Service not to disclose particulars of their patients for political purposes.

The Minister of Health (Mr. Iain Macleod)

I have studied carefully the documents sent to me by the hon. Lady. It is desirable that everybody should be aware of their right to a postal vote and equally important that any information given should be made available to all political parties who ask for it. There is nothing wrong in responsible citizens, doctors or others, bringing to the notice of those concerned, whatever their politics, their rights as postal voters.

On the specific question about extracting patients' names from doctors' lists, I would not expect information concerning doctors' National Health Service patients, which is normally regarded as confidential, to be disclosed for some entirely different purpose. I am sure that doctors understand the position, and that no special communication is necessary.

As my hon. Friend the Assistant Postmaster-General was mentioned yesterday, I should add that the letter referred to was sent by one of his ward chairmen to five doctors and that my hon. Friend had no knowledge that this letter had been sent. The letter itself, of course, is in no way a breach of the electoral law.

Mrs. Castle

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his answer was quite inadequate to the situation? Is he aware that almost all the time evidence is coming to me which seems to suggest that this approach to doctors and nurses is centrally organised? Is he aware that I have this morning received a letter by a Conservative member of the Bedfordshire County Council to a nurse employed by that authority and that the letter begins: Dear Nurse"— so and so— Dr. Hill has asked me … It then goes on to request that this Conservative councillor, the employer of this nurse, should receive from her for postal vote purposes a list of old people whom she knows will not be able to go to the poll. Will the right hon. Gentleman get in touch with the Conservative Central Office, of which he used to be a distinguished member, and find out whether this is a centrally organised campaign and, if so, have it stopped at once?

Mr. Macleod

The hon. Lady is badly at fault here. The only point on which there can reasonably be criticism, and with which I dealt quite fairly in my statement, was the question of extracting names from a list that is confidential. Apart from that, it is of great importance that people should be aware of their right to a postal vote and all that information should be brought properly to the attention of those concerned.

Mr. Elliot

On the question of a centrally organised campaign, is it not a fact that the Minister of Health in the late Socialist Government, at the time of the last Election, wrote especially to all hospitals to ask them to ensure that all these voters on the absent roll were aware of their rights, that their names should be put on the absent voters' roll and that a doctor's signature should be obtained for that purpose? Does that not show that these steps are in accordance with previous practice?

Mr. Macleod

It is quite true that this has been common form among political parties. In the instance referred to by my right hon. Friend the Member for Kelvin-grove (Mr. Elliot), the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) circularised all hospitals about absent voters' arrangements and asked hospital medical staffs, not only for lists of in-patients but of those awaiting admission and those who were out-patients, to arrange for the necessary forms and to see that hospital medical officers signed them.

Mr. H. Morrison

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a great distinction between this case and official action being taken by a Government or local authority in order to convey to people what are their electoral rights? To that, there can be no objection. But is there not objection when there is evidence, as here, of deliberate use of the National Health Service and the local government service, not for the State to convey information, but by politicians and political parties in order that their party may be advantaged? Is that not what is happening at this Election and what happened at the last Election? Will not the Minister, together with the Minister of Housing and Local Government, see that this exploitation of the National Health Service and the local government service for Conservative Party purposes is stopped? Is he aware that the conclusion of this letter from the Conservative county councillor for the Luton ward, in which the Postmaster-General is involved—the Postmaster-General is sitting on the Front Bench opposite and this is an action on his behalf—is: I would be most grateful if you could send your list "— that is, to Nurse Ingram— by return in the enclosed S.A.E. to my secretary, as we have to arrange to give the voters an application card and get their doctors' certificate, all before 12th May. I put it to the Minister that he is conniving at the exploitation of public services for private political purposes.

Mr. Macleod

If the right hon. Gentleman considers that this sort of a distinction should be drawn between the sort of circular I have quoted from the Ministry of Health and anything issued from the Conservative Central Office, then, of course, I will be very happy to quote from "The Labour Organiser," issued by Transport House before the last Election, giving detailed instructions about how to obtain postal votes in National Service hostels. It makes these two disgraceful statements. First: Our biggest handicap is that Party organisation in hostels is extremely difficult, and until recently we did not have a single Party member inside the hostel. It also says: Unless the barriers are removed and Labour Party workers are allowed to contact the workers inside the precincts … they will remain outside our ranks, and through the lack of proper contact many thousands of postal votes will be lost. Much other evidence can be produced if the right hon. Gentleman would like it. The right hon. Gentleman will agree that these are disgraceful statements and will be glad, I am sure, to take this opportunity of explaining them to the House.

Mr. Morrison

The right hon. Gentleman has now moved off the track. He has been reading about hostels. Any political party has a right to say that it wishes to further its recruitment and its support. What I am asking the right hon. Gentleman is: will he stop this scandal, which existed at the last Election and is now proceeding in this, I gather with the connivance of a Minister of the Crown? Will he give instructions that persons employed in the public service, or persons officially associated with public service, shall not exploit their position for the purpose of getting votes for political parties?

Mr. Macleod

I will send out to those I employ, who are the hospital staffs, precisely the same instructions that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ebbw Vale sent out.

Mr. McAdden

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that it is a serious reflection upon the integrity of the medical profession to suggest that they would use their professional position to influence the votes of their patients? Is it not their duty, as the guardians of the sick, to draw their attention to their rights? Is not it also the duty of those who are interested in a true vote being expressed by the people to see that those who are entitled to vote by post or otherwise get that right? Are not both parties, in fact, doing that, and is not this a lot of fuss about nothing?

Mr. Macleod

All that is perfectly true, and no one knows it better than the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Lewisham, South (Mr. H. Morrison). He has merely started the Election campaign a little early.

Mr. Woodburn

Nobody denies the Minister's agility as a propagandist, but is not it a little bit slick to answer a Question about hospitals by making a statement about hostels?

Mr. Macleod

Not at all. In the first place, I gave an Answer from the Ministry of Health. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Lewisham, South then said that that was a very different matter from anything issued centrally, so I quoted him straight away something issued by Transport House.

Mrs. Castle

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the British Medical Association has commented on the Hornsey case, which I raised yesterday, and is reported in the "News-Chronicle" as saying that this comes under a ruling that a doctor does not give any information about a patient without the patient's consent; it would be a breach of etiquette. Is he aware that in this matter the British Medical Association is giving a lead which puts to shame the party opposite?

Mr. Macleod

I entirely agree with the British Medical Association. If the hon. Lady had listened to my answer she would know that I covered precisely that point.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. There is no Question before the House.

Mrs. Castle

On a point of order. I wish at the appropriate time to move the Adjournment of the House. If this is the right moment I wish to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 9 to call attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, the failure of the Ministry of Health to take steps to prevent persons in the employment of the National Health Service disclosing any confidential information obtained in their professional capacity in order to assist a political party at the General Election.

Mr. Speaker

Such a Motion is out of order today under Standing Order No. 16.

Mr. Woodburn

Can you explain to the House why it is out of order, Mr. Speaker? We should be interested to know.

Mr. Speaker

Paragraph (8) of Standing Order No. 16 says: On any day upon which the chairman or Mr. Speaker is, under this order, directed to put forthwith any question, the consideration of the business of supply shall not be anticipated by a motion for the adjournment of the House, and no dilatory motion shall be moved,…and the business shall not be interrupted under any standing order. Today is such a day.

Mr. H. Morrison

I understand the point you have made, Mr. Speaker. From a quick reading of it I would not be disposed to make representations on it, but, my hon. Friend being excluded from moving her Motion today under Standing Order No. 16, would you be good enough to consider whether she might raise the point tomorrow, which will still be the earliest practicable time on which she could wish to move the Adjournment of the House?

Mr. Speaker

As the Standing Order which I have quoted prevented the hon. Lady from asking leave to move the Adjournment of the House today, I did not concern myself with the merits of the matter at all, because the technical objection is insuperable. I would point out that we shall soon be considering the Consolidated Fund (Appropriation) Bill on which, if there is any Ministerial responsibility involved in the point, it would be in order to discuss it. Of course, if there is no Ministerial responsibility, it would not be in order to discuss the question on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House.