§ 2. Mrs. Eileen Gordon (Romford)What plans he has to seek to amend the law relating to the treatment of those suffering from mental health problems. [98927]
§ 16. Mr. James Plaskitt (Warwick and Leamington)What plans he has to seek to amend the law relating to the treatment of those suffering from mental health problems. [98941]
§ The Minister of State, Department of Health (Mr. John Hutton)On 16 November, we published a consultation paper on the reform of the Mental Health Act 1983. Our proposals are aimed at providing better protection for the patient and the public, underpinned by stronger safeguards for patients who are subject to compulsory care and treatment. Copies are available in the Vote Office.
§ Mrs. GordonI thank my hon. Friend for that answer and for the Government's moves to modernise mental health services. For my constituents, the acute mental health hospital is Warley in Brentwood. Despite the best efforts of its staff, it is a dreadful Victorian institution that should have been closed about 10 years ago. Luckily, it will be soon be empty, and not a moment too soon.
Does my hon. Friend agree that it is disgraceful that the previous Tory Government pushed ahead with care in the community without the resources or understanding to implement it properly? That caused problems for both patients and the public. Will he reassure me that we will take due note of representations from health professionals and groups such as MIND in drafting new legislation, especially on compulsory treatment orders, in balancing the rights of patients and the public?
§ Mr. HuttonI can certainly give my hon. Friend the assurances that she seeks. For too long, mental health services have been at the margins of the NHS, and that is not good enough. It must change. For too many patients, care in the community had become "couldn't care less in the community". That is not good enough either. Our proposals will strengthen the legislation and provide better protection for both patients and the public. I hope that they will command widespread and general support in the House.
§ Mr. PlaskittThe modernisation of mental health services is welcome. Can my hon. Friend say what individual legal safeguards he can introduce for those subject to compulsory treatments?
§ Mr. HuttonI certainly can. Taking away a citizen's civil liberties is a serious step, and one that we are not prepared to take lightly. The proposals that we are consulting on represent a significant step forward in providing greater and stronger legal protection for those in our community who may be subject to compulsory treatment orders. I assure the House that if the proposals are enacted, it will guarantee for the first time that all these important decisions are made by independent judicial bodies. That is a significant and welcome strengthening of the legislation.
§ Mrs. Marion Roe (Broxbourne)How does the Minister propose to tackle the problem of recruitment and retention of qualified mental health staff?
§ Mr. HuttonI do not know whether the hon. Lady has had the opportunity to read the national service framework for mental health, which we published at the end of September and sets out our proposals in some detail. As it happens, I announced today the establishment of a special group of NHS-led professionals, chaired by Sue Hunt, the chief executive of Coventry Healthcare NHS Trust. Her job by March next year is to produce sensible, concrete recommendations to tackle those issues. I agree that burn-out rates and stress among mental health services staff are critical and must be addressed. We will not succeed in our ambition to modernise mental health services unless we have the best trained and qualified, and most committed, work force that we can provide.
§ Mrs. Ann Winterton (Congleton)Is the Minister aware that the mental health services are often seen as the Cinderella of the national health service and that services for young people are particularly patchy? Does he know of the work of a charitable organisation in my constituency called Visyon, which seeks to assist young people with mental health problems by supporting them and their families? Has he any plans to increase funding for such organisations, which fill the gaps in the NHS?
§ Mr. HuttonI am sorry to say that I am not aware of Visyon's work. If the hon. Lady wants to write or speak to me about it, I would be happy to have that conversation. We are committing £90 million of additional public money to improve mental health services for children and adolescents. The hon. Lady is right that those services have been patchy and inconsistent. We have a clear responsibility to improve them for our young people, and we are going to do that. It will form an important plank in our ambition to modernise mental health services to make them fit for the next century.
§ Mr. John Gunnell (Morley and Rothwell)Does my hon. Friend plan to amend the section of the mental health legislation under which many people receive electroconvulsive therapy against their wishes?
§ Mr. HuttonThe Richardson committee, which made proposals to us recently about reforming the mental health legislation, has proposed a number of ways in which the dispensing of ECT might be strengthened to tackle some of the concerns that my hon. Friend has raised. I know that he feels strongly about the subject. We are currently 457 consulting on the proposals and we shall consider closely what people say to us about how we can change the law. ECT is well established as a life-saving treatment for general psychotic depression and that is why we would have to think carefully about restricting access to that treatment.
§ Mr. Nick Harvey (North Devon)Can the Minister give assurances that the inclusion of compulsory treatment orders in the Green Paper, which we have not yet had a chance to debate, is not a means of compensating for a shrinking mental health service in which there are substantial numbers of vacancies for psychiatric nurses and even more for psychiatrists? With 980 mental health beds lost since Labour came to power, is there not a danger that this potentially draconian measure will be used to bridge the gap between the expectations placed on mental health services, fuelled in a sense by the national service framework, and the level of resourcing so far devoted to it?
§ Mr. HuttonThat is a load of nonsense. The answer to the hon. Gentleman's question is no. He has to look carefully at what we are proposing. He says that we have not had a chance to debate the Green Paper, but we only published it last Tuesday. There will be plenty of opportunities to discuss it. The issue for the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends is simply that the community care legislation is failing and the mental health legislation as a whole is failing patients, the public and staff. So it is simply not an option to consider not changing the legislation. We have to change it. We have to strengthen the provisions, but I should point out to the hon. Gentleman that we are doing that as well as strengthening the legal safeguards for patients who might be at risk of being compulsorily treated. That is the right way of dealing with the matter. We are spending £700 million on top of the money that is already going into the mental health service to improve the services for people. The mental health service has been a Cinderella service, but it will not be in the future.