§ 2.37 p.m.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGHMy Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Minister of Health is now in a position to give his decision on the future of the Princess Louise (Kensington) Hospital for Children.]
§ THE MINISTER OF STATE, SCOTTISH OFFICE (LORD STRATHCLYDE)My Lords, this matter concerns a proposal made to my right honourable and learned friend the Minister of Health by the Board of Governors of St. Mary's Hospital and debated in your Lordships' House last year. The proposal was twofold: first, that for a temporary period during adaptations of the maternity unit at St. Mary's Hospital two wards at Princess Louise Hospital should be used for maternity patients; and second, that thereafter the Hospital should become a hospital for adults.
My right honourable friend has considered this proposal very carefully in the light of the views of the hospital authorities concerned, of the University of London and St. Mary's Medical School, of the Royal Borough of Kensington and other interested bodies, of the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Burleigh, and of the other Members of your Lordships' House who took part in the debate to which I have referred. He has had regard also to the terms of a restrictive covenant attaching to the land on which Princess Louise Hospital stands, which limits the use of the building to that of a hospital for children with maternity wards, and also to his obligations under Section 6 (4) of the National Health Service Act, 1946.
859 All these considerations have led my right honourable and learned friend to the conclusion that he would be justified in approving the temporary use of two wards for maternity patients, but that he should not approve the long-term use of the Hospital for adults but should review the future of the Hospital again towards the end of the period of temporary use for maternity purposes.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGHMy Lords, while thanking my noble friend for his reply, which at least means that the plan for complete conversion of the Children's Hospital to adults use is not to be gone on with immediately, may I ask him to give some indication of the total number of beds to be used for mothers, and for how long? And will the noble Lord give the House an assurance that such partial use will be related solely to the period required for the rebuilding of St. Mary's Maternity Department?
§ LORD STRATHCLYDEMy Lords, in reply to the noble Lord's first question, I would say that thirty-nine cots in the two wards to be converted are to be removed and there will be provided in place twenty beds for mothers. It is anticipated that the period will be for about two years after the work of adaptation has been completed; and it is expected that the Board of Governors will begin adaptations this year. The answer to the noble Lord's third question is, Yes; but, as I have already explained, the future use of the Princess Louise Hospital will be reviewed towards the end of the period of temporary use of the two wards for maternity purposes.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGHMy Lords, in view of the indefiniteness, not to say rather evasive nature, of my noble friend's reply, I would ask him for an assurance that this plan of the Ministry is not just a way of doing by the back door that which a recent decision of a Scottish court has made it difficult for the Ministry to do by the front door. Will my noble friend either accept or deny that suggestion?
§ LORD STRATHCLYDEMy Lords, I think I have explained that my right honourable friend has an open mind. He has no desire to prejudge the situation which may exist when the maternity unit 860 at St. Mary's Hospital is ready for occupation. I am not aware that the decision made by the Scottish court, to which the noble Lord has referred has any bearing on my right honourable and learned friend's decision.