HC Deb 01 November 1979 vol 972 cc1606-16

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Le Marchant.]

11.13 p.m.

Mr. Ted Fletcher (Darlington)

I wish to put a case for a public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the death of Trooper Wayne Bell, of the 15th/19th King's Royal Hussars, in West Germany on 14 November last year.

From correspondence that I have received from the Minister, I can summarise the background to the case. The views that I am now expressing are the views of the Ministry. It appears that Wayne Bell returned to barracks on a Saturday after spending a convivial evening with his friends. There was a certain amount of high spirits when they returned to barracks, and a little horseplay. It appears that they were chasing each other along a corridor when Wayne Bell slipped and banged his head against a protruding pillar. As a consequence, his comrades put him to bed. When he did not recover, they reported to the medical reception station and an ambulance arrived about 10 minutes later. A nursing sister came with the ambulance and in answer to an inquiry she was told that Wayne had been drinking. She may have formed the conclusion that he was under the influence of alcohol. At that time he was conscious.

When Wayne as taken to the medical centre, the nursing sister carried out a more detailed examination and she noticed two small grazes on the back of his head. She did not attach much importance to that at the time. She reported what she had found to a doctor, who carried out a further medical examination. He also noticed grazes on the back of Wayne's head, but he claims that there were no signs of injury. He concluded that Wayne was suffering from the effects of alcohol and arranged for him to be taken to the unit guardroom.

The doctor left instructions that Wayne should be woken every 15 minutes, and that was done, but the orderly sergeant-major became concerned about his condition and arranged for him to be returned to the medical reception centre. Wayne was unconscious at that time. He was placed in a bath for a short time in an attempt to revive him, but without success.

About an hour later it was realised for the first time that Wayne was in a critical condition and he was dispatched by ambulance to the local hospital at Paderborn, where urgent resuscitation was carried out. After about 45 minutes, when Wayne failed to respond to the treatment, he was transferred to a civilian neurosurgical unit at Heesen, where an operation was performed to stop bleeding from the left side of his brain. However, his condition continued to deteriorate and he died on 14 November. A post mortem examination was held on 17 November and it confirmed that there were abrasions on the head, but no fracture of the skull. The cause of death was a deep haemorrhage, which was not apparent when the operation was carried out. That is an outline of the case submitted in the first letter that I received from the Minister in April.

I then received representations from Mr. Bell senior, which I forwarded to the Minister. I received in reply a letter that contradicted certain parts of the first letter. For example, the time factor was not mentioned in the first letter, but the Minister conceded in the second letter of 14 June that what Mr. Bell had said about the delay in Wayne receiving treatment was largely correct. The Minister wrote: What Mr. Bell says is largely correct. It was two hours from the time Wayne was brought to the guardroom from the medical reception station until he was returned there by Land-Rover. I emphasise "Land Rover" because the word "ambulance" was used in the first letter. The letter continues: It is true that once Wayne had been returned to the medical reception station it was an hour before the medical officer was called. That information was not in the first letter.

Mr. Bell senior went to see the German surgeon who performed the operation. The surgeon said that when he received a telephone call from the unit he was advised that Wayne was suffering from alcoholic poisoning, but the surgeon told Mr. Bell that it was apparent to him that Wayne was suffering from brain damage. In fact, Mr. Bell was informed by the surgeon at the clinic that his son had a fracture of the skull, and that his head was struck with such force that the surgeon was under the impression that he had been in an automobile accident.

There we get a differing medical opinion. One doctor says that there were small abrasions. The surgeon who operated says that the condition was more serious, that it was obvious to him from the start, and that it appeared to him that Wayne had been in a car accident.

Then there is the suggestion that Wayne was treated as though his condition was due to the effect of alcohol. But the truth must have been quite apparent to the authorities, because they had been told that Wayne had banged his head. In addition to that, Wayne was running up and down corridors in horseplay with his colleagues, and obviously this could not have happened had he been in such a condition through alcohol that he could not have run at all. Therefore, it must have been apparent to the authorities, having been told that he had banged his head, that something very serious was wrong with this boy.

I ask the Minister this question: why was Wayne sent to the guardroom when beds were available at the medical centre? Why was he sent to the medical centre, transferred back to the guardroom, and sent back again to the medical centre when in fact he could have been kept there?

These are only a few factors arising out of this particular case. There are many questions that need to be answered, but those questions will not be answered because the inquiry that was held by the military authorities was a private inquiry. Mr. Bell was not allowed to attend, nor was any member of his family. He was not allowed to have a legal representative there. He could not listen to the evidence. This inquiry was conducted behind closed doors.

Had this accident occurred in this country, there would have been an inquest. A coroner's court would have taken evidence. The coroner and legal representatives would have been able to cross-question witnesses. Parents would have been allowed to be present. At the end of the day a verdict would have been given. If the coroner had had any strictures, he would have made those strictures. It would have been open and above board. It would have been reported in the press. Everyone would have known that justice had been done.

If a serving soldier in West Germany meets with an accident, there is no public inquiry whatever. Indeed, it has been impossible for Mr. Bell not only to be there personally but even to get a transcript of the proceedings of the inquiry. This gives rise to serious suggestions that the Army may have something to hide. I am not suggesting for a moment that it has something to hide. All that I am saying is that when inquiries are conducted in these circumstances it gives rise to the question whether something is being swept under the carpet.

I can understand that in certain circumstances secret inquiries are necessary, particularly if they are dealing with information that might otherwise be revealed to a potential enemy, but this, obviously, is not such a case. All that the inquiry had to determine was how Wayne met his death. It could have been determined publicly without any adverse effect.

I do not want to prejudge the issue. It may well be that the military authorities have done everything that they possibly could in the circumstances. If that is so, obviously they should not object to an open inquiry. But whilst they object to a public inquiry there will always be nagging doubts whether the medical staff concerned exercised the degree of skill and care that is expected of them.

I am telling the Minister that justice should not only be done but should be seen to be done. Justice has not been seen to be done in this case.

I gather that there are precedents for public inquiries, because the Minister says in his letter to me: It is not the general practice"— I emphasise "general"— to hold them". Therefore, I presume that particular inquiries have been held in public. This is clearly a case in which the facts should come out at a public inquiry.

It is essential that not only the Bell family but other families with sons serving in the Armed Forces—and, indeed, the public at large—should be sure that justice has been done. Therefore, the Minister should reconsider his decision, conveyed to me in a letter, that an inquiry should not be held. I sincerely hope that he will reflect on what I have said tonight.

The Bell family have gone through a great ordeal through the loss of a much-loved son. Their demand for a public inquiry should not be pushed aside as if their feelings were of no account. They are a military family. The father has been in the Armed Forces for 27 years, and Wayne thoroughly enjoyed the Army. Indeed, he was such a good soldier that he was sent to Darlington to help in a recruiting campaign. It comes as a great shock to the family to see the barriers that are being put up by the military authorities to stop them learning how their son died. As a consequence, it is essential that there should be a thorough inquiry into the circumstances in which this boy met his death.

I urge the Minister to act quickly. Almost 12 months have passed since the untimely death of Wayne Bell. It will be increasingly difficult, as time goes on, to hold a public inquiry. I understand that, for example, one of the witnesses has left the Service and another has been sent to Northern Ireland. The further we get away from these events, the more difficult it will be to hold a public inquiry with all the evidence that is necessary. The delay is certainly not due to anyone other than the Department. In its letter of last April, the writer said: I am only now in a position to let you know the result of the inquiry. Six months passed before the results of the inquiry were known to the local Member of Parliament and the Bell family.

The Minister advises the family to pursue the case through their solicitor. Where would that get them? Only the Minister can decide whether an inquiry should be held. That is why I appeal to him to give consideration to this request. Why should the Bell family be put to the expense of obtaining a legal opinion? They are a working-class family, with limited financial resources. Why should they be put to the expense of operating through a solicitor when the Minister has the power to demand an inquiry?

Another matter that arises is that Wayne Bell had a considerable sum of money—about 300 deutschemarks—when he died, and it has disappeared. I think that only £1.13 has been returned to the family. They have also lost a valuable gold medallion—a family heirloom presented to Wayne by his grandfather. Although the Minister says that all possible inquiries have been made, it is unsatisfactory that no trace can be found of these items.

That is not the main point. The main issue is the need for an inquiry into the circumstances in which Wayne Bell met his death. Such an inquiry must answer the question whether the correct medical procedures were carried out. It must consider whether there was any delay in summoning medical assistance. It must decide whether there has been any negligence on the part of the authorities.

For all these reasons, I hope that the Minister will assure me tonight that there will be a public inquiry. If he decides that it is not possible to give me that assurance tonight, I hope that he will reflect on the matter in the next two or three weeks. Perhaps he would let me know then whether he would be prepared to consider such an inquiry. I appeal to him to hold a public inquiry in this case, in the interests of natural justice.

11.31 p.m.

The Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Army (Mr. Barney Hayhoe)

First of all, I would like to express my sympathy to the Bell family over the tragic death of their son. I am fully aware of the deep concern felt by the hon. Member for Darlington (Mr. Fletcher) about the circumstances surrounding the tragic death of Trooper Wayne Bell. I notice that in introducing this subject, the hon. Member referred to "the Minister" the whole time, as if it were a single Minister, but there was a change in the middle of the correspondence, and the first letter was sent to him by my predecessor.

In view of the hon. Member's suggestion that there was some discrepancy between what was said by my predecessor and what I have said in correspondence, it would be wise for me to go quickly over the general background to this case. Responsibility for providing medical care for the Army in Germany in both peace and war rests with the RAMC and the Queen Alexandra's Royal Army Nursing Corps. These corps operate five military hospitals, an RAF hospital, and a number of medical reception stations, which are maintained both to relieve pressure on the hospitals and to provide a medical service of what might be called "cottage hospital standard" in areas where there is a significant Service population, and which are often remote from the hospitals.

The hospitals are equivalent to good general hospitals and their standards are high. Of necessity, the medical reception centres are much smaller. Their main function is to provide treatment in less serious cases and to undertake initial assessment of treatment in other cases which must subsequently be referred to hospitals possessing a specialist staff and a more complete range of equipment and facilities. In cases of emergency, where transfer to a military hospital is considered impractical, patients are referred to nearby German hospitals.

At the time of his death, Trooper Wayne Bell was serving with his unit—the 15th/19th King's Royal Hussars—near Paderborn, in Germany. He had enlisted in the Army in September 1975, and was 20 years old. On the afternoon of Saturday 11 November 1978, Wayne Bell went out drinking with some friends in Paderborn. He returned to the barracks about 6 p.m. and, in the course of some friendly horseplay in the corridor, slipped and banged his head on a projecting wall pillar. His friends thought that he was either dazed or unconscious, and they put him on his bed and at the same time summoned an ambulance from the nearby medical reception station at Sennelager.

The ambulance was dispatched immediately and arrived at the scene of the accident 10 minutes later. A civilian nursing sister who came with the ambulance noted that Wayne, who was still lying on his bed, was conscious. His friends informed her that he had been drinking with them, and the nursing sister returned in the ambulance with Wayne to the medical reception station at about 6.30 p.m., where she carried out rather more detailed examinations.

She noticed two small grazes on his head, but she could find no evidence of serious head injury after carrying out checks of pulse, respiration, level of consciousness and eye pupils. These checks are a matter of routine in such cases. They are designed to provide an initial assessment of the patient's general condition. The nursing sister was aware at this stage that there might be a head injury, but in the absence of any indications to the contrary she concluded that Wayne's condition was due to the effects of alcohol. She reported her findings to the medical officer on duty, and he carried out his own examination. He, too, noted the small grazes on Wayne's head, but could detect no signs of a serious head injury. On this basis he also formed the opinion that Wayne was suffering from the effects of alcohol.

References have been made to the fact that no blood tests and X-rays were taken. Facilities for taking blood tests were not available at the medical reception station, and the specimens would have had to be sent to the nearest military hospital. Nor were there any X-ray facilities at the medical reception station. The decision to undertake an X-ray examination is a matter for the attending doctor's discretion under normal medical practice, but I understand that even had Wayne's symptoms suggested that an X-ray would be advisable it is unlikely that the true nature of his condition would have been detected. I am advised that X-rays of the skull are notoriously difficult to read because of the complexity of the skull, and perhaps I should add that the comprehensive post mortem examination revealed no fracture of the skull.

I need not stress the difficulties facing doctors in cases involving drink and the possibility of head injuries. The medical staffs are, none the less, accustomed to dealing with them and are aware of the possibility that head injuries may be more serious than at first apparent. Clear guidance and procedure exist to ensure that account is taken of such a possibility, but ultimately the action that is taken depends upon the medical opinion and judgment at the time of the examination.

In this case the medical officer decided that the evidence indicated that Wayne was suffering only from the effects of alcohol and he should therefore be taken to his unit guardroom to recover. At 8.15 p.m. he was returned to the guardroom, but, as a precaution, instructions were left that Wayne should be woken up, if necessary, every 15 minutes to ensure that this state of intoxication did not worsen, to keep a check on his general condition and to ensure that he did not otherwise harm himself. I have no doubt that at that time the medical officer felt that he was taking adequate steps to ensure the well-being of his patient.

The doctor's instructions were followed by the guardroom staff. At about 9.50 p.m. the orderly sergeant-major became concerned about Wayne's condition and called the orderly officer, who issued instructions for him to be returned to the medical reception centre. In the interests of speed, Wayne was taken to the medical reception centre in a Land Rover. I do not think that there is a conflict between that statement and what was said by my predecessor in his letter last April.

By that time the staff at the medical reception centre had changed shift, and though the medical officer on duty was the one who had seen Wayne earlier, there were now at the centre two fully trained State registered nurses, and in addition two regimental medical assistants who had volunteered to carry out extra duties that evening because their medical officer was not present, but was on call by telephone. The units were on exercise in the area.

The soldiers who had brought Wayne to the reception centre explained that it had not been possible latterly to rouse him. He was examined by a civilian nurse and was found to be unconscious, but his blood pressure was normal. His symptoms and general condition still suggested that alcohol was the cause. There were at that stage no indications that the situation was more serious. The nurse therefore did not call the medical officer. Instead, the two regimental medical assistants, at the suggestion of one of them, were allowed to place Wayne in a cold bath for about one minute in an attempt both to revive the patient and to wash him.

The first indication that Wayne was in a serious condition was that his breathing stopped at about 11 p.m. His pulse was still detectable, but it was necessary to resuscitate him. At this point the medical officer was called, and he arrived within a few minutes. He realised that Wayne's condition required more specialised and intensive treatment than the medical reception centre was equipped to provide, and, as a result, the nearest military hospital being about an hour's drive away, it was decided that Wayne should be sent immediately to the local German hospital in Paderborn, where he arrived at about 11.50 p.m.

The initial diagnosis still linked his condition with his intake of alcohol, but after 45 minutes his condition deteriorated. For the first time, at 12.3 a.m. on 12 November, a symptom was observed that indicated that a head injury might be at the root of the problem. As a result, he went to the civilian neurosurgical unit, where he arrived at 2.30 p.m.

An extra-dural haemorrhage of the brain was diagnosed, following a special X-ray. I am advised that that form of haemorrhage results from damage to a blood vessel external to the membrane covering the brain and that it is usually associated with severe external damage to the head. However, I remind the hon. Gentleman that there was no external evidence of such a severe injury, and no skull fracture was found at the post mortem.

On the basis of the diagnosis an operation was carried out to arrest bleeding, but unfortunately the condition of the patient deteriorated and he died on 14 November.

The post mortem examination confirmed the presence of a superficial abrasion, showed that there was no skull fracture, and found the cause of death not to be an extra-dural haemorrhage in connection with which the operation had been performed but a sub-dural haemorrhage involving the network of blood vessels covering the brain.

There is no doubt that the medical staff at all times made a judgment as to what they thought was best. The inquiry revealed no ground for disciplinary action against any individual. However, the administrative procedures and instructions that existed were not followed completely throughout the sequence of events. These have therefore been thoroughly reviewed, revised and expanded in order to extract every possible lesson from the tragic circumstances of this case.

The hon. Gentleman suggested a need for a public inquiry. I regret that I cannot agree. The domestic investigations carried out by the Army were thorough and comprehensive. Witnesses were interviewed and statements taken. I do not believe that a public inquiry would elicit any new facts. A summary of the facts has already been given to the solicitors acting for Mr. Bell.

I hope that what I have said tonight will give further information about the circumstances surrounding these tragic events. I am considering whether the information that the Department can give parents in these summaries of boards of inquiries can be expanded if such an unfortunate case as this recurs in the future.

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will welcome the fact that I am having a further look at the procedures governing inquiries into the deaths of Service personnel overseas, and trust that the hon. Gentleman and the Bell family will be assured by what I have said that—

The Question having been proposed after Ten o'clock and the debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned accordingly at seventeen minutes to Twelve o'clock.