USE OF TITLES (Hansard, 2 May 1984)

§ Mr. Kenneth Clarke
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
It will be convenient to take at the same time new clause 5—Use of the term 'optician'— 'The following paragraph shall be inserted after section 2 of the Opticians Act 1958:
"(3A) Any individual who takes the title of optician when he is not registered on one of the General Optical Council's registers, or who takes or uses any name, title, addition or description falsely implying, or otherwise pretends, that he is registered in any of the registers shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £500.".'. and Government amendment No. 63.

§ Mr. Clarke
The new clause extends the protection of title given to people with particular qualifications. That means that only people who are qualified to describe themselves as professionals of a particular sort may hold themselves out to the general public as qualified. No doubt we shall come on to the mainstream of policy in due course.
The Government are proposing that in those cases where there is absolutely no health risk to the patient, non-qualified people may be able to dispense and sell spectacles. The Government's case rests in part on the proposition that an adult person should be left free to decide for himself whether he wants to take advantage of the services of someone who is fully qualified or whether he wishes to avail himself of the services of someone who is not professionally qualified but who might provide him with a cheaper or more convenient service.
If we are relying on consumer choice, obviously the consumer must know with whom he is dealing; we do not want to enable people to be deceived by non-qualified people who might hold themselves out as registered or qualified. Therefore, we have strengthened the law from the point of view of the title "optician" and propose to extend the law to the title "optometrist", which is increasingly being used by those who, in the past, have been known in this country largely as opthalmic opticians.
I shall not take the House through the drafting of the new clause unless hon. Members wish me to do so. I shall simply explain the three basic principles that we have adopted. First, we have endeavoured to ensure that the public will not be led into believing that they are dealing with a qualified person when they are not. Secondly, we have tried to avoid undue restriction on the use of the word "optician" as a common description of someone selling glasses. Thirdly, we have sought to safeguard those people and bodies who traditionally have described themselves as optician, for example, manufacturing opticians, which is a well-known title in the profession but which does not always imply a qualified person.
We have met the first requirement — that of protecting the public against people posing as being qualified—by making the use of the title "optician", when a sale is being made to the public, carry the implication that the person is holding himself out as registered when he uses that title.
We have met the second requirement by allowing it to be a defence to prove that in the circumstances in which the title was used it was not reasonable to imply registration. That means that somebody who carefully 372 describes himself to the public as, say, an unregistered or unqualified optician cannot be prosecuted because the word "optician" appears in such a context.
We have met the third requirement by excluding its use in connection with sales other than to the public. Somebody who supplies glasses only to registered opticians or dealers in optical appliances would be able to describe himself, for example, as an optician because it is in the usual colloquial use of that word that such people have always described themselves as opticians.
We discussed this matter at length in Committee. I was pressed by Opposition Members and by some of my hon. Friends, including my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Mrs. Knight), to tighten up the law in this area, and the new clause is the Government's endeavour to fulfil our commitment to do that.

§ Mr. Dobson
We welcome what the Government have done to tighten up the law on the use of the title "optician." As the Minister said, the new clause appears to meet the points that were made in Committee by Conservative and Labour Members and adds an additional measure of protection not only for the profession but, more particularly, for patients when buying glasses.
This additional protection in relation to the word "optician" will be more important in the future than it has been in the past if the Government's other proposition, to get rid of the requirement that everyone who dispenses glasses should have a professional qualification, goes through.

§ Mr. Michael Meadowcroft (Leeds, West)
The new clause covers the same ground as new clause 4, which was tabled by my hon. Friends and myself. It is somewhat longer. I take the points made by the Minister as to the reason for covering more ground and giving more detail. The crucial point is that in the light of the earlier debate, and the Committee proceedings, the Government's proposals give the game away. The Minister said that the Government wish to give the consumer choice; then, if the word "optician" is to be registered it is suggested that someone who goes to a person who carries that name wants higher grade service.
I know that we shall come later to the nub of the debate about practising and about who can dispense but there is a problem if someone has to exercise consumer choice. It is a shame if there is economic pressure because people may not be able to exercise their choice freely. Obviously I welcome the new clause because it is similar to new clause 4 that was tabled on the same topic. There seems to have been a strange coincidence; I do not want to use a post hoc ergo propter hoc argument, but the Government's new clause appeared a few days after new clause 4 was tabled.
I am glad that the Government have recognised the force of the argument in new clause 4 and I only hope that they will show the same interest in other amendments proposed by my hon. Friends on the Liberal and Social Democratic Benches.