§ LORD DOUGLAS OF BARLOCHMy 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 to state what is the present scale of remuneration of (a) registrars, (b) senior registrars, (c) junior hospital medical officers, (d) senior hospital medical officers and (e) consultants (full time) employed in the national hospital services, and what are the corresponding figures recommended by the Spens Committee, increased proportionately to the increase in the cost of living.]
§ THE MINISTER OF STATE, SCOTTISH OFFICE (LORD STRATHCLYDE)My Lords, the present scales, including the interim increases given last year, pending, and without prejudice to, the Report of the Royal Commission on Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration, are as follows: registrar, £935 to £1,061 a year; senior registrar, £1,210 to £1,540 a year; junior hospital medical officer, £852 to £1,182 a year; senior hospital medical officer, £1,653 to £2,126 a year; consultant, full-time main scale, £2,205 to £3,255 a year. Consultants may also receive distinction awards, varying from £500 a year to £2,500 a year. It would be impracticable to give the figures recommended by the Spens Committee adjusted by the increase in the cost of living, because no official cost-of-living index appropriate to persons in these 441 salary groups is available; and in any case the Spens Committee considered that regard should be had not only to the change in the value of money but to the increases which have in fact taken place since 1939 in incomes, both in the medical and in other professions. May I remind your Lordships that the general question of the remuneration of doctors in the National Health Service is under consideration by the Royal Commission.
§ LORD DOUGLAS OF BARLOCHMy Lords, in thanking the noble Lord for that Answer, I should like to ask him whether it is not the case that a comparison with the recommendations of the Spens Committee, adjusted in the most moderate fashion to take account of the factors which they mentioned, would produce a most unfavourable comparison with the rates that are being paid.
§ LORD STRATHCLYDEMy Lords, that may be; I should not like to express any opinion, one way or the other. But I do not think it would be appropriate for me, at a time when the Royal Commission is sitting, to go into a matter which raises the general question of remuneration for doctors.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, is it not a new principle enunciated this afternoon, that general tribunals, inquiries and the like should not be guided by a general cost of living and its relation to the purchasing value of the pound in particular professions? What is the particular difference in dealing with persons that leads the Government to adopt such an idea as that?
§ LORD STRATHCLYDEMy Lords, I think that is somewhat far removed from the Question which I was invited to answer.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I think it is a pertinent question arising out of the verbal Answer given by the noble Lord. He has given that principle to the House this afternoon, and I should like to have an explanation of it.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEMy Lords, is it not a fact that if the noble Lord, a Minister, enlarges the scope of a Question by stating a general principle, then members of the Opposition have the right to cross-question him about it?
§ LORD STRATHCLYDEMy Lords, I did not give any such indication as to what were the Government's views. What I quoted was the Spens Committee, and the words I used were:
in any case the Spens Committee considered that regard should be had not only to the change in the value of money, but to the increases which have in fact taken place since 1939 in incomes both in the medical and other professions.I made no statement of Government policy whatsoever.
§ LORD DOUGLAS OF BARLOCHMy Lords, I give the noble Lord notice that I will return to this matter to-morrow afternoon.