§ EARL WINTERTONMy 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 they will introduce regulations or, if that be necessary, legislation to ensure that where a court has held that a consultant or senior hospital medical officer in the National Health Service has been wrongfully dismissed by a Regional Hospital Board or board of governors of a teaching hospital he should be immediately reinstated in his original post.]
THE EARL OF ONSLOWMy Lords, under the National Health Service Act, 1946, a statutory responsibility rests on Regional Hospital Boards and boards of governors of teaching hospitals for the provision of specialist services in the hospitals under their control, and Section 14 (2) of that Act specifically reserves to the Boards the power to appoint consultants and similar staff. In addition, the terms and conditions of service of hospital medical and dental staff provide that a consultant or senior hospital medical officer who considers that his appointment is being unfairly terminated has the right of submitting his ease to the Minister of Health before a decision to terminate the employment can be carried into effect. If in spite of these safeguards a consultant or other officer considers he has been wrongfully dismissed, his remedy lies with the courts which may award damages. In those circumstances Her Majesty's Government are not satisfied that it would be justifiable to introduce regulations or legislation for the purpose the noble Earl suggests.
§ EARL WINTERTONMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend Whether he knows that I am fully aware of the present situation? Is he further aware that what I am asking him to do is to deal with the situation which has arisen in a certain case, in which a distinguished consultant was held by one of Her Majesty's Courts to have been wrongfully dismissed, and was awarded damages; and the Judge made some wounding observations, not only about the particular hospital board, but about the Ministry of Health? Will he give further consideration to this 751 matter in order to avoid the possibility of a similar case arising in future which might easily result in great unpopularity both to the Government and to the Ministry of Health?
THE EARL OF ONSLOWMy Lords, I am fully aware of the case to which the noble Earl refers. It is almost impossible that it could happen again, because the contracts now are all the same, which they were not then, as this was a takeover case from the voluntary hospitals to the National Health Service. I wonder whether the noble Earl is as fully aware of the case as I am, because it was a very strange circumstance. This came about because the documents were not produced by the man concerned five years ago.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEMy Lords, is the noble Earl aware that this case is creating considerable concern, and is reaching the stage of a scandal? This obstetrician was dismissed. Mr. Justice Barry, in the Queen's Bench Division, declared that he had been wrongfully dismissed; he awarded him damages. Yet there is no means by which he can secure redress. What my noble friend is asking is whether, by a simple alteration of the regulation, this injustice can be remedied.
THE EARL OF ONSLOWMy Lords, I can answer the noble Viscount on that point. The situation is this. At the time, this doctor was operating in a hospital—a voluntary hospital taken over by the National Health Service—and he had been taken on with the Service when the hospital became nationalised. The trouble arose, and the doctor was eventually dismissed by the Board and told that he had a right of appeal. This, I may tell your Lordships, was in 1952. He produced no documents of his contract for service at that time, and the then Minister thought that he was not entitled to a right of appeal under his then alleged contract for service. In 1957—that is, some years later—he produced a letter from the hospital board saying that they were taking him over on the new form of contract for service and the papers would be sent to him shortly.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEMy Lords, does the noble Earl consider that anything he has said—no doubt it is quite accurate—can excuse the case of a man who the Queen's Bench Division has declared was 752 wrongfully dismissed and entitled to damages? The noble Earl has nothing but an explanation, which may be no doubt very good; but it does not redress what is a major grievance.
THE EARL OF ONSLOWMy Lords, I can answer the noble Viscount quite happily. I said that if this doctor had produced this letter at the time he was dismissed by the hospital board who told him he had the right of appeal, the Minister would certainly have heard the appeal. What the Minister's views would have been I cannot say. But the doctor did not produce these papers, and at the time he was thought not to be eligible for this appeal.
§ LORD SILKINMy Lords, this is a general question, and is not particularly related to an individual case. The general question is that if such a thing should happen in the future, and a doctor is found to have been wrongfully dismissed, can it be right that he should not be reinstated? Will not the Government consider making regulations so that in such a case in future a doctor will be reinstated?
THE EARL OF ONSLOWMy Lords, I understand that all the doctors are now under this particular form of contract, and it is almost impossible that they could be wrongfully dismissed. But what I can tell your Lordships, which I think is of great value, is that the possibility is now being considered of amending the regulations to enable Boards, where the appointments of consultants are terminated, through no fault of their own, but owing to redundancy, to put these doctors into other jobs, without their having to go through the paraphernalia of answering advertisements.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I should really like to know, in view of the decision of the Court, what steps the Ministry have taken to see that this particular professional man is properly rehabilitated. Has he been so rehabilitated? Has he been reappointed? Has he suffered no loss of status in his reappointment? What is the position?
THE EARL OF ONSLOWMay I finish? He is also employed by a local authority on certain work. After the judgment the Minister wrote to the hospital board and said that he felt there was a moral obligation, and that should this man apply in the ordinary way for any work that was going, if he was as good as any other applicant that moral obligation should weigh in his favour.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYEMy Lords, arising out of the answer given by the Minister, and now that the question seems to have got on to this particular case, could the Minister answer two questions? First, has this doctor received his damages; and, secondly, is the Minister now prepared to reconsider retrospectively the case of this doctor who, according to the Court judgment, has been wrongfully dismissed?
THE EARL OF ONSLOWMy Lords, I understand that this doctor has received substantial tax-free damages, as awarded by the Judge, who at the time said that there was no possibility of reinstatement. After all, one has to remember that he was in a post which the hospital chose to divide into two separate posts. Do your Lordships really consider that it would be sensible, after five years, to tip out two perfectly good men, who were doing the work admirably, and to put him in, when the Judge himself, in this purely technical case, awarded him some £7,000 damages and he is earning a good living in his own profession?
§ EARL WINTERTONMy Lords, in thanking my noble friend for the care he has given to this matter, and in view of the obvious feeling on both sides of the House, may I ask him one further question? Will he ask the Minister to give full consideration to taking every step necessary to avoid similar cases arising in future?
VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLS-BOROUGHMy Lords, I think this is a good suggestion and promise. Would it not be wise, in view of the extent of the Service now, and the doubts about these matters, to have a Departmental Committee to inquire into what should 754 be the proper basis of discipline of professional men and to submit a report to Parliament?
THE EARL OF ONSLOWMy Lords, I think that is something of which the Minister will obviously take notice.