HC Deb 02 May 1960 vol 622 cc690-3
24. Mr. Rankin

asked the Minister of Health if he is now prepared to make a statement on the report of the Pilkington Commission.

Mr. Walker-Smith

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave my noble Friend the Member for Hertford (Lord Balniel) on 11th April.

Mr. Rankin

May I assure the Minister that I read that reply with great interest? Can he tell me whether he has received the reactions of interested bodies to the differential payments scheme in which doctors of distinction can participate? Have any suggestions been made to him about the components of that distinction in the case of general practitioners? Would it be, say, services to the patient, or would it be the acquisition of further academic awards? Has he noted the alternative suggestions of the Medical Practitioners' Union about the use of the £500,000?

Mr. Walker-Smith

There are later Questions dealing with the subject and and perhaps it would be better to await those.

Dr. Summerskill

Is not the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that there was a very useful debate in another place last week on the Pilkington Report? Does he not think that the House should have an opportunity to ventilate matters such as those which my hon. Friend has raised and other questions about the Report?

Mr. Walker-Smith

Those are questions for my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House and for discussion through the usual channels.

Mr. Speaker

Mr. Robinson—Question No. 25.

Mr. Rankin

On a point of order. The Minister raised a number of points. In view of the nature of his answers, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

Mr. Speaker

I do not pause to reflect on the consequences of the fact that I had already called Mr. Robinson.

31. Dr. D. Johnson

asked the Minister of Health to what extent the acceptance by the Government of the recommenda- tions of the recent Report of the Royal Commission on Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration as they stand, provided the doctors and dentists accepted them on the same basis, embraces the proposal for a special fund of £500,000 for the purpose of differential payments to general practitioners; and whether, in the light of the controversial nature of this proposal, he will make it a matter for separate negotiation from the main body of proposals.

35. Mr. K. Robinson

asked the Minister of Health to what extent his acceptance of the recommendations of the Pilkington Commission implies the introduction of distinction awards for general practitioners or the establishment of A-plus awards for consultants; and how far his agreement will be required to any method of distributing the Central Pool proposed by the medical profession.

Mr. Walker-Smith

Full acceptance of the Royal Commission's recommendations necessarily includes acceptance of the award proposals for consultants but not the creation of a special fund for differential payments to general practitioners which would depend, as recommended by the Royal Commission, upon whether a scheme was agreed for its application. The distribution of the Central Pool would as hitherto be a matter for agreement between the Government and the profession.

Dr. Johnson

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that many people will welcome what he has just said? Is he likewise aware that a dim view is taken by pretty well everybody who has expressed an opinion on this proposal for differential payments? Is he aware that if he presses the matter he will be in danger of finding himself in the unique position of trying to give taxpayers' money to people who do not want it?

Mr. Walker-Smith

That is certainly a unique position. What we had better do is first to seek to examine the possibilities as fully as we can and in consultation with the medical profession from which, as my hon. Friend has fairly stated, so far divided views have been put forward.

Mr. K. Robinson

Is the Minister aware that the misgivings which have been expressed by hon. Members opposite and by the profession about the merit awards for general practitioners are shared by this side of the House? Can he say why he took the step of announcing his acceptance of these recommendations as a whole before canvassing the views of the House? Is he aware that many of us have views on the matter which he might find helpful in his discussions with the profession? Will he keep in touch with his right hon. Friend about fixing a debate at an early date?

Mr. Walker-Smith

I am sure that my right hon. Friend would have in mind any general desire to debate these matters, but, as I have already said, these are matters which are normally considered through the usual channels and are not for me.

The Government's offer to accept the Report as a whole if the professions would do the same seemed to us to be a proper and equitable way in which to approach the matter. If the hon. Gentleman has in mind any proposals in the Report which he thinks ought not to be followed, no doubt he will say so. Our approach is that neither side should pick or choose the bits which happen to suit it best.