"Working for Patients"

HC Deb 01 March 1989 vol 148 cc274-5

15. Mr. Nicholas Bennett

To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received in response to the National Health Service White Paper "Working for Patients".

Mr. Forsyth

My right hon. and learned Friend has received a number of positive responses to the White Paper "Working for Patients". We will shortly be publishing six working papers setting out in detail how the White Paper proposals are to be implemented in Scotland.

Mr. Bennett

Does my hon. Friend share my surprise that a White Paper which will give patients more choice and a faster service should be opposed by Opposition Members? Does he agree that their only vision for the future of the Health Service is a Health Service run by COHSE and NUPE for the benefit of COHSE and NUPE?

Mr. Forsyth

I agree with my hon. Friend, but he is not being entirely fair to Opposition Members. I note that the hon. Member for Falkirk, East (Mr. Ewing) has offered to abandon his political convictions and to favour the idea of the Falkirk district infirmary becoming a self-governing hospital if proposals for its closure were ever implemented. As neither the health board nor the Government have any such proposals, it is an interesting response to our White Paper.

Mr. Harry Ewing

Does the Minister appreciate that at the time when I considered the proposals from the consultants I was unaware of another option—closure, as the Minister himself says, over his dead body? If that option is still available, we will take it.

Mr. Forsyth

Even if the hon. Gentleman is not prepared to defend the interests of his local hospital in Falkirk, we certainly are, which is why we have invested so heavily in it with new maternity and geriatric facilities. I am not sure that my dead body in exchange for the hospital would be a good deal for his constituents.

Dr. Godman

Is it not the case that many general practitioners are deeply concerned about the inadequacies of the White Paper? Is it not the case that many general practitioners fear a diminution in the quality of the treatment given to patients if these proposals are implemented? Does the Minister agree that, where Scotland is concerned, the authors of the White Paper know little or nothing about medical practice in general and nothing at all about general practice in particular?

Mr. Forsyth

I think I can follow that question.

The only general practitioners who will be concerned will be those who listen to the misrepresentation coming from the Opposition Benches. There is no question of patient care being anything other than enhanced as a result of these proposals; and it is particularly perverse to argue that giving general practitioners more responsibility and an opportunity to control their own affairs as practising family doctors will be to the disbenefit of patients. It is true that particular aspects of the delivery of primary health care services in Scotland need to he considered, and we are currently discussing with doctors' representatives how we can implement our proposals in Scotland in the most satisfactory way. I am delighted to say that we are having a very responsible and positive response from the medical profession.