HAMMERSMITH HOSPITAL (TRANSPORT SERVICES) (Hansard, 19 March 1959)

§ Mr. Frank Tomney (Hammersmith, North)
The matter I wish to raise with the Minister tonight concerns the Hammersmith Hospital in my constituency, which, in association with the West London Hospital and St. Mark's, is a post-graduate school under the same board of governers. This hospital is one of the biggest in the country, and certainly one of the most famous. During the last twenty years of its history, no fewer than 12,000 doctors have been trained at the hospital. It has 700 beds. In-patients number 12,000 yearly, 50 per cent. of whom come from Hammersmith. There are 200,000 out-patients a year.
At present, the hospital is being gravely affected by the cuts imposed by the London Transport Executive in its recent economy drive on transport services. As the post-graduate hospital depends entirely upon its out-patient service for its training and knowledge, it is not difficult to understand the situation which has arisen as a result of the curtailment of the bus services.
The nearest Underground stations are White City and East Acton on the Central Line and both of them are 15 minutes' walking distance from the hospital. The only bus service which now passes the hospital is the No. 7A route, which runs 766 between the City and Acton via the West End, operates on a ten-minute schedule up to 6.30 p.m. and provides only a meagre service outside peak hours.
During morning and evening, the hospital cannot cope with the passenger traffic to and from the hospital. Out-patients and staff leaving the hospital after 5 p.m. have frequently to wait for long periods and in inclement weather. This cannot but be harmful to those attending for out-patient treatment. After 6.30 p.m., bus No. 7 operates on a 15-minute schedule, with extreme inconvenience for hundreds of visitors and patients to the hospital. The list of visitors to see patients at the hospital totals no less than almost 5,000 every week.
A survey has been taken by the postgraduate medical school of the numbers of people visiting the hospital in two complete weeks. From midnight on 13th September, 1958, to midnight on 20th September, 1958, the total was 27,391 people and from midnight on 5th October until midnight on 11th October, 1958, no fewer than 30,776 people visited the hospital. In addition, there is a full-time staff of 2,500, of whom approximately 350 nurses live in hostels or other accommodation outside the hospital. Despite London Transport Executive's drive for efficiency, it is apparent that there are services which cannot, and should not, be curtailed. The service to this hospital is one of them.
During peak hours, it is almost impossible either to board a bus going to the hospital or for patients going home, quite apart from the staff, to board a bus at the hospital gates. Formerly, two services, Nos. 7 and 7A, operated on this route. The No. 7 service has now been abolished and this is causing great difficulty especially to the nursing staff in arriving at the hospital in time for duty.
The post-graduate school which is connected with the hospital is an organisation of international importance. Last year, 330 of the total of 466 doctors attending the school came from abroad. It thus becomes apparent that this hospital, of international renown, is suffering serious inconvenience in its everyday management, as well as inefficiency, due to the curtailment of the bus services. It is imperative for the Minister to bring what 767 pressure he can upon the London Transport Executive to review the position concerning the service which it provides to this hospital.
It is not unknown, for example, that during the recent bad weather, patients coming to the hospital were unable to get on a bus and in several cases had to be put straight to bed by the hospital staff. This cannot be good either for the patients, for the hospital or for the medical staff. In addition, patients arriving for out-patient treatment—the Minister will recall my mentioning a figure of no fewer than 200,000—are arriving not merely half an hour late for appointment, but, in some cases, up to one hour late. One therefore sees that grave dislocation is caused, seriously affecting the hospital and its work.
It is true that other facilities are available. The No. 72 bus, however, which passes along Westway, is at least seven minutes' walk from the hospital. Route No. 105, which operates along Westway from Shepherds Bush, is the only other available route which passes directly parallel with the hospital, but it necessitates crossing a footbridge over the railway line. This is impossible for people who are lame and crippled and, in consequence, they, too, arrive late for appointments. Representations have been made from time to time by the hospital board of governors to the London Transport Executive, but no relief to this problem has been forthcoming. That is why I am raising the matter tonight.
As I said in opening, the hospital is probably one of the most famous in the world. People come from all parts of London for attention. The ambulance service, both the sitting-up service and the ordinary service, is gravely extended. Because of the curtailment of the bus services, the ambulance service has had to cope with the ever-increasing number of patients who could not get transport to the hospital. In addition, distinguished visitors from abroad attending the hospital for courses and training or to view the hospital find that they have at least 15 minutes' walk from either of the two stations. No taxi services are available locally. Thus it can be seen that the problem builds up into a quite formidable one.
The board of governors recognises that this problem exists. They have tried every 768 means within their power to secure some alleviation of the difficulties. They have failed to do so, and the Board of Governors is drawn from a wide cross-section of the population, under the chairmanship of Sir Desmond Morton, a man with a great record of service in diplomatic and public life. They have been most patient over the last twelve months in their endeavours to rectify the position, but, unless something is done immediately, the management of the hospital and its working will get more and more into a state of chaos.
There is an alternative. On the Central Line, which passes the hospital, and at a point immediately facing the hospital there is enough land available to make either another station or another halt or stopping-place. This probably would be the ideal answer to the whole problem. If this could be looked at by the Minister as a possible solution it would be appreciated. The hospital is growing every day. New departments and clinics are being added. If the Minister could endeavour to have talks started about the provision of a halt it would be greatly appreciated. The halt need not be an elaborate affair.
In the meantime, in view of the importance of this matter, I suggest that something should be done. I hope that overtures will be made immediately to the London Transport Executive to have the No. 7 bus service reinstated. The position is further complicated between 5.30 and 7 p.m. in that buses moving from the congested city are full. Visitors to the hospital cannot board at the boarding points, and when the buses pass the hospital they have already come through the densely populated industrial area of Park Royal. The cycle of events which I have described demonstrates quite clearly that there is complete chaos. I am not unmindful of the difficulties of London Transport Executive but I hope that an effort will be made by the Minister, even if it is only in an advisory capacity, to reinstate at least one bus service to alleviate the position.

§ The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation (Mr. G. R. H. Nugent)
I must congratulate the hon. Member for Hammersmith, North (Mr. Tomney) on securing the Adjournment to ventilate this complaint of the difficulties of the 769 hospital at Hammersmith. I agree with him that it is a hospital of importance and that it is doing a splendid job. Naturally, I am very concerned to hear that it should be handicapped in the access for the staff, for the patients, the out-patients, and the very large number of visitors to the hospital. I am naturally concerned to hear the hon. Member's complaint about the effect of London Transport Executive's cuts last year.
However, although expressing sympathy and concern, the hon. Member will understand that I do not in fact have any control over this situation. Nor is my right hon. Friend responsible for it. It is essentially a matter of day-to-day management for London Transport Executive and the British Transport Commission. When I knew that the complaint of the hon. Member was to be raised, I inquired from the Executive what the position was and what it had done.
I can confirm what the hon. Member said, that the No. 7 bus service was taken off last August, but my information from the Executive is that the No. 7A service was extended and increased at the time to counteract the removal of the No. 7 service. It is not as much as the combination of the two before, but the Executive fully intended to cover the needs of this very important hospital.
What puzzles me a little is that the Executive tells me that it has not had a complaint from the Board of Governors about the new service or deficiencies about which the hon. Member has told us. The Executive said that when it was about to reduce the service, the Board of Governors asked what changes were to be made and was given that information by the Executive, but since then the Executive has had no further communication or complaint from the Governors.

§ Mr. Tomney
The letter which I have mentioned states that representations were made by the Board of Governors in collaboration with Hemmersmith Borough Council, but they failed to obtain any augmentation of the existing No. 7A service. It was hoped that something would be achieved by those repre- 770 sentations from the local authority and the Board of Governors.

§ Mr. Nugent
My information is that the Executive has not received these. In any event, as a result of what the hon. Member has said, no doubt the complaint will reach the right ears and I hope that helpful action will be taken.
I am sure that the hon. Member will not mind if I remind the House that there is a machinery, even if the Executive fails to respond in a helpful way. The Transport Users' Consultative Committees were set up under the 1947 legislation and they give users a chance to complain when the Executive is unable to meet complaints. I should put it on the record that that machinery is there to safeguard travellers and give them a chance to have their complaints considered by an independent body, and it is only right that it should be used as far as possible.
Of course, I have had a word with the Executive, which is very concerned to do what it can to help in these difficulties, as the hon. Member has acknowledged. It has had falling traffics, particularly since the bus strike of last year, and is having great difficulty in making both ends meet.
As I said, however, it recognises the great importance of the hospital, and in the light of the serious complaint made by the hon. Member tonight I believe that it would be very glad to send down a senior official to talk to the Board of Governors or the Hospital Secretary, in order to hear just what the problems are and to see what can be done to meet them. The problems of which the hon. Member has told us are serious, and it is a matter of getting the details of them to see what can be done to meet them.
I hope that the hon. Member will be satisfied with that general assurance, which is as far as I can go. I will see that his remarks are conveyed to the Executive, and I am sure that it will do its best to help him to meet the needs of this very important hospital.