§ Constitution of Boards of Governors of teaching hospitals.
§ The Board of Governors of a teaching hospital shall consist of a chairman appointed by the Minister and such number of other members so appointed as the Minister thinks fit, and if those members—
- (a) not more than one-fifth shall be nominated by the university with which the hospital is associated;
- (b) not more than one-fifth shall be nominated by the Regional Hospital Board for the area in which the hospital is situated;
- (c) not more than one-fifth shall be nominated by the medical and dental teaching staff of the hospital; and
- (d) other persons shall be appointed after consultation with such local health authorities and other organizations as appear to the Minister to be concerned, including, in the case of the original members of the Board of Governors of a teaching hospital designated before the appointed day, the governing body of any voluntary hospital comprised or to be comprised in the teaching hospital.
§ LORD ADDINGTON moved, in Part I, to leave out "and such other members so appointed" and insert "members appointed by local authorities as herein after provided and such other members appointed by the Minister." The noble Lord said: This is one of a series of Amendments. It is designed to provide that local health authorities should have a power of direct nomination to the Regional Hospital Boards, and to certain others set out in the Bill. One representative for each local authority would be unfair representation as between the authorities themselves, or impracticable owing to the numbers involved to select from the 647 nominated persons those who are to represent the authorities on those Regional Boards. The difference between this proposal and that of the Bill is this. Under the Bill the Minister would presumably invite local authorities to submit the names of suitable representatives. He can appoint few of all such persons, and he may choose to go outside the ranks of those persons altogether. We heard from the noble Lord, Lord Horder, on the Second Reading of this Bill an interesting but somewhat disquieting account of the way in which the present Minister conducts consultations. We cannot, therefore, rely altogether on that leading to members whom the local authorities want being upon the very important bodies.
§ Under this proposal the Minister must choose from the persons nominated by the local health authorities, but he is nevertheless free to refuse a nomination, in which case a further name would be submitted. The practice of appointment by the Minister on the nomination of interested bodies is already in this Bill, and is already accepted in the case of boards of governors in this Schedule, and in the case of executive councils under Schedule 5, where the eight members are directly nominated by the local authorities concerned. The plea for direct representation can be pressed, I think, owing to the fact that these elected representatives of the local authorities will be really the only representatives of the public and those who use the hospitals themselves. They would, therefore, be the main representatives of the consumer interest. So that in a particular locality those who are concerned with the provision of the hospital accommodation, or who want some further provision, can raise the point at the local elections and see that their representatives are thoroughly well informed as to the position of those who are appointed to these boards and to these other bodies. It is therefore suggested that, having regard to the experience of the local health authorities in hospital administration, they should be very strongly represented on these Regional Boards. These Boards are completely new bodies, and the Schedule gives no indication of the number they should contain. It is suggested that it would be very reasonable if the local authorities had at least one-third of the full number. I beg to move.
648
§
Amendment moved—
Page 65, line 29, leave out ("and such other members so appointed") and insert the said new words.—(Lord Addington.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThe noble Lord has conveniently discussed this matter rather widely, and I am grateful to him for having done so. The broad issue here is how these people should be appointed. Should you have persons selected by the Minister after consultation with persons skilled in local government; should you have persons nominated by the local government organs; or should you have a kind of half-way house where the Minister selects from a panel so nominated? As a result, I am sorry to say, of a good deal of experience of this matter I have definitely come to the conclusion that where you have anything like a joint board on which there are people nominated by conflicting local authorities you tend to get a body which is not coherent, which is fissiparous, and which does not work happily together. That is because, as I said the other day, all its various members tend to look too much to the rock from which they are hewn; they tend to represent competing and conflicting interests rather than to try to do a job of work with that esprit de corps which is so necessary for any body. There is that tendency; I do not put it higher than that.
Of course, where you are appointing a body which is intentionally appointed to represent a particular interest, as, for instance, in the Fifth Schedule, to which the noble Lord referred, there the point is that you do want to get a body of people who represent, as he said, the consumer interest; you want to have the producer interest equally represented and you want a neutral chairman. We think it is right to do it in that case, that is why we do it in the Fifth Schedule and do not do it in the Third Schedule. Of course I appreciate that whenever you entrust a Minister with discretion you run the risk of indiscretion, but at the same time I feel quite sincerely that you are more likely to get a good and harmonious Board (and it is of the essence of the success of this scheme that the Regional Hospital Board should be a good and happy one) if, you entrust the Minister with the responsibility for selecting people whom he thinks to be suitable after consultation with various 649 interests. For that reason I do not think I ought to accept this Amendment.
§ LORD ADDINGTONIn those circum stances I do not propose to pursue this Amendment, but I do hope the Minister will really select those people who are in touch with the local authorities and in touch with the people themselves. We want to get it as democratic as possible; we want as much interest as possible taken by the people where the hospital services are. These members representative of local authorities are the main means of getting local opinion and local wishes represented on the Regional Hospital Board. It is also important that they should be in touch because they are the sole means of achieving that liaison with which we dealt earlier when discussing Clause. In the circumstances, I agree to withdraw the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ 6.14 p.m.
§
LORD LUKE moved, in Part I, paragraph (c), after "area" to insert:
(d) persons experienced in hospital management appointed after consultation with such organizations as the Minister may recognize as representative of such persons;
The noble Lord said: With this Amendment I seek to improve the constitution of these Regional Boards. I think it will be agreed that the members of the Boards should be drawn from the widest sphere possible in connection with the health service. At the present moment, members are drawn from the universities, from the medical profession, from local health authorities, and then, rather as an after thought, it looks as if somebody said: "I suppose we ought to have somebody from the hospitals." I agree, of course, that hospital representatives may be included in paragraph (d)—"persons appointed after consultation with such other organizations as appear to the Minister to be concerned." The Schedule refers only to the original members of the Board. It rather looks as if representatives of the voluntary hospitals will be chosen in order to set up the Board and will be dropped again very quickly. I consider that there ought to be on these Regional Boards persons with experience in hospital management, not just in the first place but always, for surely there will be people who will gain that experience after the operation of the Act.
650
As constituted in this Schedule, the Board is shorn of representatives from that most important element, the hospitals them selves. In view of the functions which the Boards are to perform in respect of hospitals, I consider this ought to be remedied. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 65, line 38, after ("area") insert the said words.—(Lord Luke.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI understand the noble Lord wants to add a fur-them specific category to the present categories of members of Regional Boards, that is to say, persons experienced in hospital management. They are to be appointed after consultation with organizations representative of such persons. I am not quite clear what the intention of the Amendment is, because the Schedule says that the original members of the Board are to be appointed after consultation with local health authorities and the voluntary hospitals, and those two between them cover all the persons experienced in hospital management. The reason we use the word "original" is that as time goes on the only persons having such experience will be those who have served on management committees or board of governors.
I do not think we ought to contemplate dealing with the associations of management committees. The noble Lord might have in mind, of course, associations of officers like the Institution of Hospital Administrators, but once we start dealing with one particular organization we get into the position of having a lot of other organizations with which we ought to deal. I certainly agree with the noble Lord that it would be a lamentable thing if on a Regional Hospital Board we did not have persons who had very great experience of the work, who had rendered valuable services to hospitals for very many years; I think, however, that they come into the two categories. Not only do they come under (d) but they come specifically under the rest of the clause—"… the original members of the Board shall also include persons appointed after consultation with such organizations as the Minister may recognize as representative of voluntary hospitals in the said area." I think that having done that we are sure of getting the services of that valuable class of people—and most valueable 651 they are. That being so, I do not think there is any need for this Amendment.
§ LORD LUKEI thank the noble and learned Lord Chancellor for his explanation. I felt that the Amendment rather strengthened the whole constitution, but in view of his remarks on it and his explanation I beg leave to withdrawn the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ 6.20 p.m.
§
LORD WOLVERTON moved, in Part I, at the end of paragraph (d) to add "including those representing the dental profession." The noble Lord said: This Amendment is very much the same as the one I moved just now on behalf of the noble lord, Lord Teviot. Its object is to secure representation of the dental profession on the Regional Boards. I think perhaps we shall be luckier with this one than we were with the last Amendment. Here again they are not specifically mentioned. In paragraph (b) the medical profession is specified, in paragraph (c) the local health authorities, and then paragraph (d) reads:
persons appointed after consultation with such other organizations as appear to the Minister to be concerned;
After that I seek to add the words: "including those representing the dental profession". We feel on this side of the House that this important body should be represented directly, and the clause should be strengthened by saying that they should be represented on the Regional Boards. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 65, line 40, at end insert ("including those representing the dental profession")—(Lord Wolverton.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI have tried to make plain in the general discussion on this Bill the tremendous importance which His Majesty's Government attach to the work of the dental profession, and I have said that if only people were more conscious of the necessity of looking after their teeth, our health as a nation would be much better than it is. On the other hand, I am very anxious not to extend the categories of people to be represented, because the Minister does not want to appoint members as representative of particular interests; 652 he wants to select people in their individual capacity. It will always be open to him to consider whether a dentist would, or would not, be a useful member of a particular hospital board, and no doubt in very many cases he ought to have one. On the other hand, if I put dentists down as one of the class of people who must be consulted, then would the noble Lord consider what answer I would have when the nurses came along? He would agree with me that the nurses play an equally important part. Then the midwives—if it were not for them where would any of us be? Then there are the pharmacists, radiographers and goodness only knows who else. I do not think, therefore, that it is wise to extend the categories. If it is left to the Minister to select a wide range of people, I can assure the noble Lord that in selecting them he will not forget something of which we are all very conscious, the immense importance of the dental profession.
§ LORD WOLVERTONIn view of the assurances from the noble and learned Lord, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ 6.22 p.m.
§ LORD LUKE moved in Part I, after "hospitals in the said area," to insert: "Before making appointments to fill vacancies the Minister shall also consult the Board." The noble Lord said: This is an Amendment to provide the machinery which seems to be absent for filling vacancies on the Board. It would appear that the Minister has a direct interest, and should therefore be in consultation with the Board when the filling of vacancies becomes necessary. As was said in another place, there would of course be consultation, but I would rather like to know what objection there is to providing for that in the Bill. The Minister will surely want to know the views of the Regional Board as a whole. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 65, line 44, at end insert ("Before making appointments to fill vacancies the Minister shall also consult the Board.").—(Lord Luke.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORYour Lordships have all been very kind and we are getting to the end of our proceedings, 653 so I will adopt rather a novel course in this case: I will ask your Lordships to decide whether you would like me to accept this Amendment. The Amend-merit requires the Minister to consult the Board, but I do not doubt that the Minister, as a matter of good sense, would normally consult the Board. If, on the other hand, you require him to consult the Board—and I am quite ready for him to do so—may you not put the Board, in certain cases, in a rather difficult position? Is it not better that this sort of thing should be done very informally with certain individual members of the Board, the Minister getting their reactions over a cup of tea, rather than put upon the Minister a duty to consult them formally? I quite see that the Regional Board might be in some difficulty. My own view is that I would prefer not to have the Amendment, but I have authority to say that if the noble Lord and other members of the House press me in regard to it, I may accept it. Having said that, it is up to the noble Lord to say what he wants done.
§ LORD LLEWELLINI cannot speak for my noble friend, but I should presume that as he put the Amendment down and proposed it, he would like it accepted. From my point of view I should.
§ LORD LUKEI must thank the noble and learned Lord for this very welcome surprise, and I should be very grateful if he would accept the Amendment.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThen I accept it.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ 6.25 p.m.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTER moved in Part II to leave out "a chairman appointed by the Regional Hospital Board for the area in which the hospital or group of hospitals is situated and such other members so appointed," and to insert "such number of persons appointed by the Regional Hospital Board for the area in which the hospital or group of hospitals is situated." The noble Earl said: This Amendment is one of four which stand in my name, and perhaps it will be convenient if I dispose of them together. It deals, of course, with the hospital management committee and the board of governors. I am very anxious that both the committee and the board should have the opportunity of appointing their own 654 chairman. That is to say, the hospital management committee should discuss among themselves as to which person would be the most appropriate to become the chairman of their committee. Exactly the same case applies in the board of governors. They would, as soon as they are set up, consult with one another, perhaps over a cup of tea, and decide who should become their chairman. Practically throughout the whole of life, in every branch of industry, in trade unions, or in political parties, the person who is head or chairman can be appointed only by agreement amongst his colleagues in that particular organization. I believe by that method in most cases you get the best man—certainly the most popular man—and one with whom generally the rest of the committee (in this case the board of governors) are prepared to work whole heartedly and in full co-operation. This is not a wrecking Amendment, but merely one to make quite certain that the committee and the board function smoothly and happily. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 66, line 3, leave out from ("of") to ("as") in line 6, and insert the said new words.—(The Earl of Munster.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI am afraid I take rather a stronger view about this Amendment than I did the last one. I do not believe this is a good proposal. I very often wondered whether the system whereby a bench of magistrates elect their own chairman was a very good one. I believe this is typically a case where you ought to have those soundings which I have suggested, and you ought to do this thing informally. I would be most sorry to see this proposal carried. Of course, so far as the management committee is concerned, when there is a vacancy or the chairman goes, in nine cases out of ten his successor more or less appoints himself. I mean there is one obvious man. But when that is not so, then the Regional Board must have the last word. If the Regional Board can have a cup of tea—I do not know whether a board can—they can discuss with the other members who is the right person to appoint. After all, he is their servant, he is doing their work, and the last word must lie with them, and they must be able in the last resort to give him that authority. There fore, I suggest to the noble Lord that 655 really his Amendment would not be in the best interests of the happy working of this Bill.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERThe noble and learned Lord I gather was talking about the hospital management committee. For what purpose is it necessary for the Minister to appoint the chairman of the board of governors of a teaching hospital? I would let the first Amendment go by willingly if the noble and learned Lord would give me the second. I cannot see why the Minister should come in and appoint the chairman of the board of governors, with whom the rest of the board may disagree. He can appoint anybody who is nominated in paragraphs (a), (b), (c) or (d). Like most other persons, they are going to be appointed to the board of governors in consultation with local health authorities. But I am very nervous about this, for I fear that you will find that the chairmen of these boards of governors will not be the people who have functioned for many years. It is possible that they will not be the existing deputy chairmen, but as I said on the Second Reading, some trusty local political colleagues appointed by the Minister.
THE MARQUESS OF READINGAs one who is a member of the board of governors of a teaching hospital, I should like to say a word upon this, though I am saying it purely on my own behalf. I should feel very much more confident as to the happy working of that hospital board in the future if I knew that we were going to continue to appoint our own chair man, rather than have one imposed upon us. It might be that the person imposed upon us would be perfectly acceptable. On the other hand, it might be that he would be anything but acceptable, then there would be all sorts of friction, pro tests would perhaps be made to the Minister and the situation, generally, would be very unpleasant. If the matter is left where it is, the appointment would be in the hands of the responsible and experienced board of governors of a teaching hospital, and they could surely be trusted to appoint as chairman a person who was both congenial to themselves and acceptable to the Minister.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI think the reason for this provision is to be found in the fact that the Minister, after all, is the person who is to be responsible for 656 this health service. One of the chief organs by which he is going to carry out his responsibilities is this hospital service, and one of the chief organs of that service will be the teaching hospitals—they are vitally important. The Minister must, therefore, have control. As I said just now wherever you give a man discretion, there is a risk of indiscretion. If the Minister is going to fill all these appointments—and there is a great number of them—with a lot of old, incompetent political cronies then the whole scheme is sunk and finished.
It depends absolutely, in this connexion, on getting a man of first-class intelligence and, I need hardly say, of integrity, representing that section of the community who will devote themselves to this work. I do not think it is really useful to consider that the Minister may (of course it is possible that a Minister might) make a whole lot of wholly unworthy appointments. I suggest that as responsibility for this service has been placed upon the Minister by the first clause of the Bill, he must have to his hand an instrument which satisfies him, and he will have very close and direct dealings, of course, with the governors of teaching hospitals. I think it is of the utmost importance that the chairman of such a board should be a man who is likely to get on well with the Minister, a man who will be amenable, one having the necessary time to discuss problems and able to discuss them.
I repeat that I do not think the Minister would be foolish enough to lump anybody on a committee without taking soundings from the various members to see who they would like to have. In the interests of the work of the hospital the Minister would obviously wish to get someone who is persona grata to the other members of the committee and also person grata to himself. In the last resort, we must assume that the Minister would exercise his discretion wisely. The choice must be left to him.
THE MARQUESS OF READINGMay I make this suggestion? Will the noble and learned Lord consider between now and the next stage of this Bill whether he would accept a proposition that the chairman of a board of governors should be appointed by the board with the approval of the Minister?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI will certainly get instructions about that, and I will consider it.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERI was going to make a similar suggestion. In view of what the noble and learned Lord has said I now desire to withdraw this. I did not intend to suggest that the Minister was a fool or would be so foolish as to appoint some ridiculous political colleague. I can, however, picture him appointing the Chairman of the Hospitals Committee of the L.C.C. to the Chairmanship of the board of one of the teaching hospitals. That is what I want to prevent. I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ 6.35 p.m.
§ LORD ADDINGTON moved, in paragraph (a) of Part II to leave out "appointed after consultation with" and insert "selected by the Board from per sons nominated by." The noble Lord said: We have discussed the main part of this Amendment already. As hospital management committees are more local in character and only deal with the area of one local authority, I suggest that the precedent of the executive council should be followed rather than the precedent of the Regional Boards. If the noble and learned Lord Chancellor is not prepared to accept this Amendment I will not move arty more, but now I beg to move this one.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 66, line 7, leave out ("appointed after consultation with") and insert ("selected by the Board from persons nominated by")—(Lord Addington.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI am afraid the same observations which I made before apply here only perhaps rather more forcibly. I do not think we ought to adopt this suggestion.
§ LORD ADDINGTONIn the circumstances I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTER moved, in Part II, paragraph (c), to leave out "the senior and insert" a committee representing the." The noble Earl said: I understood the noble and learned Lord to intimate when we were discussing Lord Moran's Amendment to Clause 12 that he would be in favour of setting up the committees. He said: "I entirely agree that it is essential to have these medical committees." I beg to move.
658
§
Amendment moved—
Page 66, line 14, leave out ("the senior") and insert ("a committee representing the").—(The Earl of Minister.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI should like to have heard from other noble Lords before I replied to this. I entirely agree of course that you have got to consult the medical and dental staff. But I should have thought the people you would want to consult would be the senior people. I must say that I look hopefully towards my noble friend Lord Moran about this. He may be able to advise me upon his. I should be very glad if he would.
§ LORD MORANI think that what this Amendment really means is that the medical staff should be consulted; not the senior members of the medical staff, but the medical staff as a whole. The medical staff because it is a very democratic body does not recognize any distinction between senior and junior members. It does not mind at all that resident officers or house officers should be consulted. It desires simply that the medical staff should be consulted ad hoc and not merely a section of the staff.
§ LORD LLEWELLINI understood it was likely that there would be medical committees in these hospitals. It was thought that they would be the people to consult as to who should be on the hospital management committees. I should have thought that if you had a medical committee that was the right body to consult rather than pick oat any particular senior persons, and that it is desirable that you should have this organization recognized as speaking for the doctors and ex pressing the doctors' views. I should have thought that this was a subject on which they were eminently fitted to give their views.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI agree that where you have a medical commit tee you ought to consult the whole body. Where there are not medical committees the Minister intends to encourage their formation. He wants to get them everywhere. But where there is not one consultation ought none the less to take place. The Minister's intention is, I am told, to consult with the senior staff who ought to be consulted, that is, the consultants and specialists, not the house men. It is for that reason that we pat in the word 659 "senior". I gladly give an undertaking, however, that where there is a medical staff committee the staff committee will be consulted as an entity without simply picking out the older and more distinguished members of a distinguished galaxy. In other cases, we shall have to consult the consultants and specialists, as opposed to the house men.
§ THE EARL OF MUNSTERI am very much obliged to the noble and learned Lord, and I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ LORD LUKE moved to add to Part II: "Before making appointments to fill vacancies the Board shall also consult the committee" The noble Lord said: This is a similar Amendment to the last, that the Board shall consult the committee before filling any vacancies. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 66, line 23, at end insert the said words.—(Lord Luke.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI have been so kind to the noble Lord already that he does not deserve any more, but he has been very kind to me, and there fore I will accept this Amendment.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ 6.43 p.m.
§ LORD MORAN moved, in Part III, paragraph (a) to leave out "one-fifth" and insert "two-fifths". The noble Lord said: I need not detain your Lordships long on this Amendment. It is concerned with vulgar fractions. It is possible that the noble and learned Lord may say that if he accepted this Amendment, it would alter the composition of the whole committee. When matters concerning major local authorities or local management committees, or even lesser local authorities, come before your Lordships' House they are warmly supported from many quarters, but the university is the Cinderella of these proceedings. I want to stress this Amendment simply because it increases the influence of the university on a committee which is fundamentally concerned with research and teaching and 660 these, after all, are the functions of a university. There are two other reasons why I think that the position of the universities should be strengthened. In the first place, that is the only way you can obtain harmoniously decentralization of specialists. In the second place, to have a university service is the only way you can bring up the standards of the periphery to that of the centre. The purpose of this Amendment is to strengthen the influence of the universities.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 66, line 29, leave out ("one-fifth") and insert ("two-fifths").—(Lord Moran.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI must say that I thought we had treated the universities pretty handsomely, but they are like Oliver Twist: they want more. Under the Third Schedule as it stands, one-fifth of the members of the commit tee are to be nominated by the appropriate university. The same proportion—that is another one-fifth—are to be appointed by the medical and dental teaching staff. This means that something like two-fifths will be academic members. The Amendment, if adopted, would mean that the academic element might be as much as three-fifths. That is a substantial majority, and I think it would be overweighting the academic representation. Three-fifths is a higher proportion than is usually found on the governing bodies of teaching hospitals at the present time. Of course, a teaching hospital has a dual function, treatment of patients, and research and teaching doctors. We must not have an undue emphasis on the teaching side for the future; we must have due regard for the patients. I suggest that the university influence, which I agree is of fundamental importance, is already adequately assured by the not ungenerous provision which I have described.
§ LORD LLEWELLINIt does not seem to matter very much whether this reads "not mare than one-fifth," or "not more than two-fifths," because, strangely enough, it does not say a minimum number. Is it the intention that normally the proportion will be one-fifth?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI under stand the intention is that one-fifth shall be university members. We have adopted these words; otherwise, we should have had complications with vulgar fractions.
§ LORD MORANAt this late hour, I will not take up very much time in explaining to the noble and learned Lord opposite that patients' interests are always looked after. That is admitted in the whole profession, and in the last twenty-five years I have seen the gradual weaning of public opinion from the idea that a teaching hospital does not exist for the care of the sick but for the teaching of knowledge. However, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§
LORD MORAN moved to leave out paragraph (c) in Part III and insert:
(c) not more than one-fifth shall be per sons nominated by the medical staff committee of every hospital in the group; and
The noble Lord said: This is a verbal alteration, necessitated by the fact that a teaching hospital is not always one in stitution. In the provinces, it is often two or three. Where that is the case, this Amendment aims at seeing that each hospital is represented.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 66, line 33, leave out paragraph ("c") and insert the said new paragraph.—(Lord Moran.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORIf your Lordships will allow me not to deal with this now, and if the noble Lord will with draw his Amendment, I will see if I can not insert suitable words on the Report stage. I am rather out of my depth.
§ LORD MORANI thank the noble and learned Lord, and beg leave to with draw.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ LORD MORAN moved in Part III, paragraph (d), after "with" to insert: "the university with which the hospital is associated and with". The noble Lord said: This is really another step to add to university influence, and in view of the fate of the former I have not great hopes. It is simply to add the university to the bodies which the Minister will consult for the remaining two-fifths in the composition of this committee.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 66, line 35, after ("with") insert the said words.—(Lord Moran.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI am sorry that I cannot help my noble friend about this, but I am glad to think that in 662 refusing him I am not destroying his hopes for the universities.
§ LORD MORANI beg leave to with draw.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ 6.48 p.m.
§ LORD LUKE moved, at the end of Part III, to insert: "Before making appointments to fill vacancies the Minister shall consult the board." The noble Lord said: This is another Amendment similar to the other two, and I do not know whether the indulgence of the noble and learned Lord will extend to this, as well as to the others. I hope that it may.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 66, line 41, at end insert the said words.—(Lord Luke.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI do not think that I ought to go further. I know that it is said that good things go in threes, but on its merits I really do not think that this ought to be accepted.
§ LORD LLEWELLINIs that right? If you consult each of the others, ought, you not to consult the board of governors before filling a vacancy? You pay the original board the compliment of consulting them; you pay the hospital management committee the compliment of consulting them; but when you are filling a vacancy of the board of governors of a teaching hospital you say—as I under stand it—that because the noble Lord, Lord Luke, has had two successes the board of the teaching hospital will not be consulted. I should have thought that it would be logical, if you consult one in this way, to consult all three. Possibly the noble and learned Lord had not his brief before him when he replied, and I hope that he will reconsider this matter and put the three in the same category.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI had better look at all three. If the noble Lord desires it, I will look into this matter. If I am putting in the other two, I will consider putting in the third. In the meantime, perhaps the noble Lord, Lord Luke, will withdraw and I will see how deeply my neck is in the noose.
§ LORD LUKEI think the noble Lord will find it is rather logical, but, never the less, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Third Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
§ Fourth Schedule: