HC Deb 16 April 1985 vol 77 cc127-8
8. Mr. Parry

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what recent representations he has received concerning the scope and level of prescription charges.

The Secretary of State for Social Services (Mr. Norman Fowler)

Since 1 January this year we have received 152 letters from Members of Parliament and 214 from members of the public about the scope and level of prescription charges.

Mr. Parry

Is the Secretary of State aware that the people who suffer chronic ill health, who are not covered by exemptions and live just above the poverty line cannot afford the increase in prescription charges? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in areas such as Merseyside, where there is a high number of chronic illnesses, this is a cruel tax on ill health and a prescription for more pain and suffering?

Mr. Fowler

I do not accept that. It would be more convincing if the Labour party had not reversed its position. It is no longer committed to the abolition of prescription charges. That has been made clear by the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher). I am sure that on this occasion he has checked his information with the shadow Cabinet.

Mr. Yeo

Is my right hon. Friend aware that as the average prescription is even now subject to a subsidy of about 50 per cent. the only question on this issue is how much longer we can go on subsidising to such a large extent the relatively small number of people who pay prescription charges?

Mr. Fowler

My hon. Friend is right. On average, the £2 prescription charge provides only 44 per cent. of the cost of the prescription. It must be underlined that 72 per cent. of patients do not pay prescription charges.

Mr. Skinner

Will the Secretary of State acknowledge that one of the arguments used has been that prescription charges bring in money for the National Health Service? If that is the case, why did we have the appalling exhibition on television last week of a consultant reporting that a children's ward at Guy's hospital had to close down and that he was unable to use 20 beds for children who were critically ill? Why do all the arguments that the Secretary of State puts up about the National Health Service and the need for prescription charges result in the ruination of young children in Great Britain?

Mr. Fowler

The logic of what the hon. Gentleman is saying is that if we take away the resources that come from charges there will have to be further reductions in the services provided by the National Health Service. At the moment, charges raise 3.2 per cent. of National Health Service costs. In 1969–70, during the previous Labour Government, they were providing 3.5 per cent. There is now no disagreement, in principle, between myself and the Opposition on the fact that there should be charges.