§ 9. Mr. Beithasked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether she will list those professions in the health and social services whose remuneration is determined as a result of recommendations of a review body rather than by collective bargaining.
§ Mrs. CastleThe independent Doctors' and Dentists' Review Body advises the Prime Minister on the remuneration of doctors and dentists taking any part in the National Health Service.
§ Mr. BeithDoes the right hon. Lady recall the comments she made when the doctors' settlement—which for family doctors was over 38 per cent.—was announced? Does she recognise that, in saying that when collective bargaining does not occur the social contract cannot apply, she makes a gaping hole in the Government's pay policy by applying no restraint to those professions which are the subject of review bodies, which is grossly unfair to those who settle within the social contract?
§ Mrs. CastleIt has always been the policy, certainly of the present Government, not to operate any incomes policy, voluntary or otherwise, at the expense purely of the public sector. That is the point, and it is on that basis that the principle of fair comparison has always guided the review bodies which have fixed the remuneration of doctors and dentists and, indeed, of other groups in our society. 227 That is a fair principle. Where there is no free collective bargaining, as with doctors and dentists, there must be some criterion, and the criterion is the movement of wages and salaries in outside industry.
§ Mr. TomlinsonDoes my right hon. Friend recognise that there are some areas within the National Health Service in which collective bargaining operates and that the fact that we have needed to appoint review bodies is symptomatic of the need for the total review of the Whitley Council machinery, which although it served us well in the past is today perhaps not the most appropriate form of collective bargaining?
§ Mrs. CastleI am well aware of the point of view expressed by my hon. Friend. Indeed, I expressed it myself following, for instance, the difficulty we had over nurses' pay last year. It was revealed that nurses had fallen badly behind under the Whitley machinery and, therefore, the Prime Minister set up the special ad hoc Halsbury Review Body to bring nurses' pay into line. That was followed by other ad hoc reviews for other groups in the National Health Service. At that time I said that I was only too willing to consider the Whitley Council machinery, and, indeed, I have already set that operation on foot. I have invited the staff representatives concerned to let me have their ideas on how they think the machinery might be improved. I met the general purposes committee of the general Whitley Council as recently as 28th May but I made clear that it is for the staff to decide on the nature of the representative and negotiating machinery they want and that it is not for me to impose changes from above.
§ Mr. SteenHas the Secretary of State any idea of the catastrophic situation that is developing in some schools where for identical work school nurses without health visitors' certificates are earning up to £1,000 a year less than is earned by school nurses with health visitors' certificates? Is the right hon. Lady aware that this anomaly is caused by the failure of the negotiating machinery, and will she take steps to do something about it right away?
§ Mrs. CastleI repeat that first and foremost it is a matter for the staff repre- 228 sentatives to initiate changes to improve the negotiating machinery. I am perfectly receptive to considering any changes. That is why I have invited consideration of the whole Whitley Council machinery. I have appointed Dr. McCarthy, a Fellow of Nuffield College, Oxford, on a part-time basis as my adviser on industrial relations. He is helping us with the review of the Whitley machinery, but the initiative must come from the staff.