HC Deb 13 March 1978 vol 946 cc26-30

Dr. Vaughan (by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will make a statement about the steps he is taking to avoid risk to patients consequent on the industrial action of National Health Service hospital telephonists.

The Under-Secretary of Slate for Health and Social Security (Mr Eric Deakins)

I understand that unofficial industrial action has been taken by some hospital telephonists who are dissatisfied with their recent pay settlement within the guidelines. Both my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services and I deprecate action of this kind, which may adversely affect services to patients. It is for health authorities, in consultation with my Department, to deal with the effects of industrial action and safeguard the interests of patients.

Dr. Vaughan

That statement will be regarded as totally inadequate by many people. Also, the absence of the Secretary of State will be taken as further evidence of the lack of leadership on the Government side in the National Health Service field.

Will the Minister tell the Secretary of State that widespread industrial action of various kinds is taking place in the Health Service today, and that this is having an extremely serious effect on the morale and care of patients? Will he also ask him to answer the question that I put to him last week on why he condemned the dentists and the doctors but has not condemned the porters at Dulwich, Westminster and Southampton, and has not openly condemned the telephonists?

Will he categorically condemn strike action in the National Health Service and make it clear to these people that when they work in the care of patients they give up some of their freedom to take industrial action? There is no place in the health field for industrial action of this kind, which affects the care of patients. Will the Secretary of State call a meeting between the health professions and the TUC with a view to outlawing action of this kind?

Mr. Deakins

I do not know the rules about asking supplementary questions on a Private Notice Question, but I was under the impression that this Question was about hospital telephonists and not about porters, doctors or dentists.

As far as the telephonists are concerned—this is the subject of the Private Notice Question, and if the hon. Gentleman had wanted to put down a Question about doctors, dentists or porters he could have done so—the facts of the matter are that I am responsible within the Department for industrial relations affecting all groups of staff, other than doctors and dentists, who are the responsibility of the Minister of State for Health.

Both the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister have condemned this industrial action unreservedly because it might result in cutting off communications between hospitals and the outside world. Some telephonists claim that they are working to rule when they are in fact censoring telephone traffic within the hospitals. I wish to make it absolutely clear that there is no such rule—and I am glad of the opportunity to do so—not only to the hospital telephonists but to the hospital managements.

Mr. Faulds

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that many of us on this side of the House find industrial action that affects the interests of patients, whether it is taken by doctors or hospital staff, as demeaningly selfish, un-Christian and unacceptable?

Mr. Deakins

These views would be widely shared in my Department. What we are seeking to do is to bring all sides together in this, the 30th anniversary year of the National Health Service, in order to see whether we can sort out these problems for the future.

Mr. Hooson

I, too, regard this action as reprehensible, as is all industrial action in the health sphere. Will the Minister say whether he has had direct talks with the unions with a view to calling off this particular form of industrial action because of the danger to patients?

Mr. Deakins

This is a complex industrial dispute, and the Floor of the House of Commons is not the place for resolving complex industrial disputes. This is not just a straight case of workers versus management. I met hospital telephonists from the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Test (Mr. Gould) recently and they declared their dissatisfaction and disillusion with the whole system of the existing channels for remedying their grievances. These channels are the Whitley Council system, and action is being taken in the appropriate Whitley Council between management and unions to try to come to an amicable solution.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. This is a Private Notice Question and I cannot allow it to run on. I shall call one more hon. Member from either side.

Mr. Skinner

Is the Minister aware that in every strike or industrial action, official or unofficial, it needs two sides to bring about the action and to create the reaction by the other side? Is he also aware that the single biggest cause of disruption in the NHS in the past few years has been the massive cuts in public expenditure that have been imposed and are still being imposed by the Minister and his Government, aided and abetted by hon. Members opposite who have put down the Question?

Mr. Deakins

This particular disruption stems mainly from dissatisfaction on the part of some with the grading system whereby there are no direct comparisons with the pay of telephonists employed outside, such as those in the Post Office. These are difficult questions to deal with and I do not see any easy solution to that grievance.

Mr. Tebbit

Since we are all agreed on this, except the Beast of Bolsover who turns out to be a fossilised dragon fly—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Member knows that, whatever is said outside here, we must use parliamentary language inside the Chamber.

Mr. Tebbit

I did not think that there was anything unparliamentary in what I said. If there was, no doubt you will guide me, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker

I thought that I heard the hon. Member use an expression which I have read in the Press but which I have never heard used in the House.

Mr. Skinner

The hon. Member can say what he likes.

Mr. Speaker

Order. That is a terrible invitation.

Mr. Skinner

Let him get on with it.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member for Chingford (Mr. Tebbit) will withdraw his expression.

Mr. Tebit

Certainly I will withdraw the expression. I shall not repeat anything that you rule as unparliamentary, Mr. Speaker.

Since we are all agreed, with one exception, that we should deplore this sort of action in the Health Service, will the Minister tell us what he will do to ensure that those who are taking this action and risking the lives of patients are brought to book and have to suffer some disadvantage, preferably in their career structure or reward, in order to make sure that others do not follow their example?

Mr. Deakins

That is a matter for the health authorities and not for Ministers. The health authorities must deal with the adverse consequences of this industrial action. If Parliament had wanted Ministers to control the day-to-day management of the NHS, it should have taken different decisions when the Health Service was being reorganised by the Conservatives in 1973. The health authorities must deal with this, and I am sure that they will take action to safeguard the interests of their patients.