HC Deb 29 July 1963 vol 682 cc33-5
49. Mr. J. Griffiths

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether, in view of the medical evidence submitted to him by the right hon. Member for Llanelly in a recent case, he will review the criteria by which the Silicosis Medical Board decide whether a coal miner's death has been caused, or accelerated, by silicosis or penumonconiosis.

Mr. N. Macpherson

No, Sir. The criteria applied by the Silicosis Medical Board are the same as those applied under the Industrial Injuries Acts and are derived from the stautory definition of pneumoconiosis, the general case-law on cause of death, and the current state of medical knowledge.

Mr. Griffiths

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, may I ask whether he will now submit the case to the Industrial Injuries National Advisory Council. Is he aware that the doctor who attended this poor man for eleven years is convinced from his knowledge of the case that the man's death was accelerated by pneumoconiosis and that that is the general view of those who have wide experience in administering the Acts over the years? Will he reconsider the matter, and, in particular, since there is grave discontent about it, ask his Advisory Council to consider whether the time has not come to presume that where pneumoconiosis has been certified, death has been accelerated by the disease?

Mr. Macpherson

To deal with the particular case, the Silicosis Medical Board found, as I informed the right hon. Gentleman by letter, that there was no significant pneumoconiosis present. In any case, I think the right hon. Gentleman, with his great experience, would agree that it would be impossible to base a decision of this kind on a single case. I do not suppose he is basing it on a single case, but he will remember that the whole subject, especially the definition of pneumoconiosis in the Act, was throughly examined by the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council in 1953, and since then both case law and medical knowledge have been evolving.

Mr. Griffiths

In the past ten years we have gained a great deal of experience and know more about this, and for that reason, if for no other, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider the matter again and refer it to the Advisory Council? Will he bear in mind that the men themselves contribute to the scheme? Does he not realise that many of us think that if this case had gone to court under the old Act the judge would have found that death was accelerated by the disease?

Mr. Macpherson

The personnel of the Silicosis Medical Board are exactly the same as those of the pneumoconiosis panels, and for that very reason they are very closely in touch indeed with the Commissioner's rulings. Perhaps it might help the right hon. Gentleman if I told him that wherever a death occurs in a case where a man has been certified to have had pneumoconiosis during his life, then, if the Silicosis Medical Board is inclined to think that the death is not attributable to pneumoconiosis the whole of the evidence is always submitted to the chief medical officer of the panels, so that in every case the matter is very fully considered indeed by experts.

Mr. Griffiths

I give notice that, owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, if this Parliament is still in existence when we come back, I propose to raise the matter then.