§ 49 and 50. Dame Irene Wardasked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will initiate fresh negotiations through the Whitley Council on nurses' conditions of service and instruct the management side to offer new terms to meet the difficulties caused by the last award, which imposed undue financial payments for food and accommodation on the nursing profession;
(2) whether he will outline his plans for remedying the pay-as-you-eat problem in the nursing profession, in view of the assurances given to the nurses whom he received on 23rd April on the steps of his Ministry at the Elephant and Castle.
§ Mr. CrossmanThe Nurses and Midwives Whitley Council is already considering the problems which have arisen in the introduction of the new scheme; and I am sending the hon. Member a copy of a letter which has been sent to hospital authorities. The assurance given to the nurses received on 22nd April was that their views would be conveyed to the Council, and this has been done.
§ Dame Irene WardI thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, but may I have an assurance that the instructions from him and his Department to the management side of the Whitley Council will enable the staff side to negotiate proper terms with the management side in order that the grievances of nurses over a wide field may be properly recognised? Is he aware that there is constant talk about the National Whitley Council as though the management side was entirely free to negotiate without instructions from his Department? The position ought to be made perfectly clear.
§ Mr. CrossmanI am grateful to the hon. Lady; she has made a fair point. My Department plays its full rôle here and takes its share of responsibility for the agreement which was reached. Nevertheless, it remains true that the agreement was reached and gave increases of between nine and 14 per cent. to nurses, one of the biggest increases they have ever had. The only criticism so far has been on the question of meals, and, as the hon. Lady knows, I am now looking into that. The Council is to meet on 13th May. I assure her that I have gone into the matter very thoroughly, and I shall brief my representatives there to make sure that we reach a satisfactory solution.
§ Dr. SummerskillWill my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, as an obviously bad agreement has been reached, that is all the more reason why it should be rectified? Nurses are not trade union-minded or militant, but that does not detract from the justice of their claims.
§ Mr. CrossmanI am not at all convinced that a bad agreement in general was reached on this occasion. No one has criticised most of the agreement; only one part has been criticized, namely, the question of meals. Therefore, I do not assume that the job done by the 941 negotiators on behalf of the nurses was a bad one.
§ Mr. Maurice MacmillanWill the right hon. Gentleman accept that the position of student nurses in particular is difficult, not least because a clear decision is required on whether they are employees and should be paid the rate for the job or they are students, in which case they should have time to study within their 42-hour working week? Further, will he accept that he will not get the whole pay structure for nurses right until pay at the top goes up? At present, part of the trouble is that the concertina has been squeezed close and needs to be spread out.
§ Mr. CrossmanThose are all important points. Student nurses are paid not a salary but a training allowance. That training allowance was increased by from 9 to 14 per cent., and the revised training allowance for students under 25 ranges from £395 to £480, according to the year of training. All this seems to be worth considering carefully, but I hope that we shall not assume in the House that the whole agreement was unsound. The whole agreement represented a great march forward for nurses as a whole.
§ Mr. MolloyWill my right hon. Friend acknowledge that the recent bitterness caused by the pay award and the requirement that nurses must pay for their meals is only the tip of the serious iceberg which is endangering a vital profession? Is he prepared to consider a special investigation into all aspects of this vital profession?
§ Mr. CrossmanNo, Sir; I do not consider that the case is made for any special investigation. I think that what the hon. Lady the Member for Tyne-mouth (Dame Irene Ward) says is correct, that the three parties must look carefully again at the agreement, as they are now doing, before the meeting on 13th May next, to see whether it is satisfactory. I do not go further than that.
§ Sir J. Vaughan-MorganDoes the right hon. Gentlemen accept that whatever the merits of the agreement may have been the effects were very bad, and that some of the instructions for implementation which have been sent out to the employing authorities have been far from clear, 942 in that some have accepted a latitude in imposing the agreement, and others have already done it?
§ Mr. CrossmanI do not agree that the reception of the agreement as a whole was very bad. The only point in it that caused dissatisfaction was the so-called pay-as-you-eat scheme, which I think was aggravated by the fact that the nurses had their increase in March and had to pay for their meals out of that, which was a very bad beginning for the scheme. I agree that there were great variations in the regions where considerable latitude is allowed in fixing these things, and since then I have written to them giving them precise instructions, which they did not have in the first place.
§ 51. Mr. William Hamiltonasked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether, in view of the concern of nurses in the National Health Service he will take immediate steps to increase the salary and training allowance payments as laid down in the National Board for Prices and Incomes Report Number 60, Command Paper Number 3585, and accepted by Her Majesty's Government.
§ Mr. CrossmanSalaries and training allowances were increased as recently as 1st January, 1969, and the National Board for Prices and Incomes recommended that the present rates should last until the end of March next year. Any claim for an earlier increase would need to be considered by the Nurses and Midwives Whitley Council in the light of incomes policy.
§ Mr. HamiltonDoes my right hon. Friend recognise that many hon. Members on both sides of the House accept the soundness of the principle implied in the pay-as-you-eat scheme? But will he give an assurance that if he receives specific examples of nurses, particularly student nurses, being worse off after paying for their meals he will take immediate action with the hospital boards responsible to bring their meal prices down, so that the nurses get the real increase which was intended for them?
§ Mr. CrossmanYes, Sir. The instructions sent last week to the regional hospital boards should achieve what my hon. Friend wants. If they do not in all cases, we shall consider further action at the meeting on 13th May.
§ Sir G. NabarroWill the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind two recent precedents, in view of the responsibility of his Department on nurses' pay? First, will he see that increases are now retroactive to the date of the last increase, as in the case of Lord Robens? Second, will he bear in mind that a 56¼ per cent. increase is considered appropriate for the chairman of a nationalised board, who does not pay for his daily meals while at work? Why should not these principles apply to the nurses?
§ Mr. CrossmanI shall certainly bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman says. These are points that I shall certainly discuss with objectivity and fairness with our representative at the Whitley Council.
§ Lord BalnielIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that we do not share his sense of satisfaction with the way in which the pay agreement was handled, and that there is widespread agreement with those nurses who wrote to The Times to say that the way in which the settlement had been handled could well endanger recruiting for the nursing profession for a number of years ahead?
§ Mr. CrossmanI naturally read the letter to The Times with care. I do not think that I expressed complacency about the way in which the matter was handled. I said that the agreement as a whole had not been criticised by the nursing profession, but that only one aspect had been criticised there. I agree that it had been unsatisfactorily handled, and further steps are being taken to put it right.
§ Mr. WoodburnIs my right hon. Friend aware that the main trouble seems to have arisen from the fact that the agreement has had unfortunate results for student nurses who come from other parts of the country and have to live in? This has given rise to some dissatisfaction. It has been an error of omission in consultation rather than an omission in intention from the agreement.
§ Mr. CrossmanOf course, it is true that there was no intended omission from the agreement. Nobody has said that the Whitley Council intended student nurses to be treated harshly. But they may well have a hard deal. This partly arises from the considerable variation between the price of meals in different hospitals in different regions. This is perhaps a problem of the relationship 944 between myself and the chairmen of the regional hospital boards.