HC Deb 08 June 1959 vol 606 cc622-5
35. Mr. T. Brown

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance, in view of the concern amongst sufferers from pneumoconiosis, if he will now consider the advisability of setting up a National Appeals Board, to which cases of suspected pneumoconiosis which have been turned down by the existing medical panels may be submitted.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

I am afraid this is not at present possible.

Mr. Brown

Arising from that reply, may I ask the Minister whether he is not aware—and surely he must be from the correspondence he has had previously on the subject—that there is growing dissatisfaction today among the unfortunate victims of pneumoconiosis at being turned down by the medical appeal tribunals? Is he further aware that the confidence of the men in these medical panels has now been destroyed? Cannot the right hon. Gentleman do something to restore the confidence felt by these men eighteen months ago and even longer back than that?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Whilst I would not go as far as the hon. Member, I appreciate that there is a widespread desire for the introduction of an appeal in this matter. I have been into it very fully. As the House may know, I made regulations at the beginning of this year introducing an appeal on diagnosis to the medical appeal tribunals in respect of other prescribed diseases.

I was not able to include pneumoconiosis for the reason that there is a very limited number of adequately qualified medical specialists, who are at the moment fully occupied on the ordinary panels. Their work, of course, will be very much increased by the wide and comprehensive X-ray survey which the National Coal Board is undertaking. When this is out of the way, which I think will not be for some time, I hope to see some progress made in this connection.

Mr. Brown

Are we to understand that consequent upon the inadequacy of medical specialists on this peculiar and particular complaint these men must suffer? Can the right hon. Gentleman not do something to arrest this breach of confidence which is now taking place, particularly in the north of England? Surely, he can do something in his Department?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

I do not accept that there is a breach of confidence. I am in close touch with those concerned, including a number of hon. Members, on various points arising from the diagnosis and treatment of pneumoconiosis cases. The Question, of course, refers to the particular expedient of an appeal. I am sure the hon. Member would agree with me that it would be no use, and indeed positively harmful, to introduce a system of appeal on a medical matter in which the appeal lay to tribunals guided by medical men less qualified than those who determined the original question.

Miss Herbison

Since the right hon. Gentleman says that at present it is quite impossible to do what my hon. Friend the Member for Ince (Mr. T. Brown) is asking for, would he not do something in the intervening period until he has the specialists—and I am not at all sure that it could not be done—to have a complete inquiry into this whole question of the diagnosis of pneumoconiosis? Surely, if the right hon. Gentleman lived in a mining area, as does my hon. Friend and as I do, he would realise the great dissatisfaction at present and the great lack of confidence in the present system.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

I do not know from the way the hon. Lady has framed her question whether she is fully aware of the very skilled and detailed research work on these lines which is being conducted by the Pneumoconiosis Research Unit at Llandough, and which is going on with the fullest encouragement from the Government.

Mr. J. Griffiths

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that the time has now come for a re-examination of the criteria upon which doctors decide their diagnosis of this disease? In particular, does he not appreciate that the margin between pneumoconiosis and emphysema has become so thin that disaffection exists because it is possible to have two men one of whom is certified as disabled by pneumoconiosis and receives compensation by way of industrial injury benefit and the other is held by the doctor to be suffering from emphysema, whereas to the layman there appears to be no difference between the symptoms and there is a growing feeling that both are industrial diseases? Has not the time come for a complete review of the medical criteria?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

I am sure the right hon. Gentleman knows that a great deal of work has been and is being done on pneumoconiosis on the one hand and emphysema and bronchitis on the other, and I should not have thought that at the present stage such an inquiry would serve any purpose other than to delay detailed consideration.

Mr. Brown

Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply and the growing disquiet in the mining areas on this matter, I beg to give notice that I will raise it on the Adjournment at the first opportunity.