§ Mr. Spearingasked the Minister for the Civil Service when the Lord President of the Council next expects to have an opportunity of reviewing the procedure rules of the Professional Conduct Committee of the General Medical Council (S.I. 1980, No. 858.)
§ Mr. LuceThese rules on the responsibilities of the General Medical Council are subject to the need for Privy Council approval of any amendments. I understand that the General Medical Council has a number of amendments under consideration but that they are unlikely to be made before next year.
§ Mr. SpearingWhen that time comes, will the Minister and the Lord President bear in mind that schedule 4(5) to 648 the Medical Act 1983 gives them powers to require further review? Is the Minister aware that, in a recent note to Members of this House, the chairman of the General Medical Council said that the council's principal task
always has been, that of informing and protecting the public".Would it not be a good thing to review the rules in the light of those excellent precepts, especially paragraph 60 of the current statutory instrument relating to the availablility of transcripts of the hearings of the GMC? Is the Minister aware that, in a recent tragic case, the wife of a deceased gentleman was asked to pay £400 for the transcript of the case heard by that council? Does he think that that charge needs review, and is it in line with the precepts that I have just quoted?
§ Mr. LuceOn that specific case, I understand that the GMC is not considering a possible amendment. The hon. Gentleman is right to say that it costs £400 to obtain a transcript if the party is found not guilty. In those circumstances, it is considered to be improper to use taxpayers' money to provide a transcript. Of course, if the party is found guilty, the transcript is provided free of charge. That is the position as it stands, and I believe that it is a reasonable position.
§ Mr. ForthWhen considering these matters will my right hon. Friend give some thought to the increasing abuse that many medical practitioners make of their position when they are prepared to intimidate and frighten their patients for blatantly political purposes? Does he not believe that it is high time the GMC looked into that and perhaps amended its rules to protect patients against abuse by their practitioners for political ends?
§ Mr. LuceMy hon. Friend may be right, but it is not really a question for me, but for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services.
§ Dr. MarekI always thought that the Minister was a reasonable man, and I was extremely surprised to hear him say that he thought that £400 was a fair sum to charge for providing a transcript. It is not reasonable, and justice cannot be done if the average person seeks redress at the GMC. I know that the case has been judged, but there must be ways of providing transcripts at vastly cheaper rates than £400. Will the Minister look into this matter? I ask him to consider seriously that sum of £400, which is not a reasonable sum to charge.
§ Mr. LuceI shall, of course, draw that point to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and my right hon. Friend the Lord President. However, the point I was making was related to the earlier question put by the hon. Member for Newham, South (Mr. Spearing). There is a policy whereby, if the party is found not guilty, it is not considered necessary to incur taxpayers' expenditure to provide a transcript. If the party is found guilty, obviously it is right to provide the funds for that transcript.