HC Deb 29 February 1960 vol 618 cc804-5
20 and 21. Sir G. Nicholson

asked the Minister of Health (1) if he will summarise the replies he has received from regional hospital boards in answer to his request of February, 1959, that they should give him the factual information on which he could base a decision whether to institute an inquiry into the operation of the domiciliary consultative service; and how this information compares with the evidence from hospital authorities reported by the Select Committee on Estimates of 1956–57.

(2) what decisions he has taken on the recommendations made by the Select Committee on Estimates of last Session in their Fifth Special Report, regarding an inquiry into the operation of the domiciliary consultative service; and what form this inquiry will take.

Mr. Walker-Smith

The replies from boards revealed little information indicating abuse of the service, and in such rare or doubtful cases as transpired action was taken with a view to putting it right. The replies also revealed the difficulty of obtaining factual information of any abuse in present circumstances. As this aspect of the consultant services among others was before the Royal Commission on Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration, I decided to await their Report before proceedings; and now that the Report has been received, I shall consider what action is appropriate in this as in other respects.

Sir G. Nicholson

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the Select Committee on Estimates found considerable evidence of abuse of the service? Is he also aware that his Department agreed to an inquiry in March, 1958, but sought the facts from the very people who had criticised the service, and that not until the matter was reopened by the Select Committee did he agree to find out the facts from regional boards? The Select Committee then recommended another inquiry. Does the evidence which my right hon. and learned Friend has received contradict the evidence given to the Select Committee on Estimates? Why is there this continual delay in answering what really was rather a serious charge on the part of the Select Committee?

Mr. Walker-Smith

We got the replies of the regional hospital boards and collated them in June of last year. The reports, in their effect, are summarised in what I have said in answer to the Question. That is, they revealed little information to show any of the abuses in the service which had been suggested to the Select Committee. The individual cases which appeared have been followed up. I will certainly consider whether it is possible to get any further and fuller information than we have already got from the regional boards, but that is how the matter stands at present.

Dr. Summerskill

As the recommendations of the Select Committee on Estimates cannot be reconciled with the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the remuneration of doctors, can the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell the House—hon. Members would be very interested to know—to which group he attaches most importance?

Mr. Walker-Smith

The choice of Paris pales in comparison with the difficulty of the choice which the right hon. Lady puts to me. I view with very great respect both the recommendations of the Royal Commission and the observations of the Select Committee on Estimates. I do not think there is any necessarily inherent contradiction. The Royal Commission made no recommendation as to the specific control of the service but said that no change should be made in the circumstances in which payments should be made.