§ Lord CARR of HADLEYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what progress has been made in the discussions initiated by the Secretary of State for Social Services between representatives of the trade unions, the British Medical Association, and the Royal Colleges involved in the Health Service with the objective of agreeing on a procedure to reduce the risk of industrial action liable to endanger the life and health of patients in the Health Service.
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, the discussions are continuing. As I stated in reply to my noble friend Lord Leatherland on 22nd June, one of the purposes of these discussions is to seek ways of ensuring that there are agreed procedures for settling disagreements quickly, before there is resort to industrial action. As a result of these discussions, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Social Services wrote to the chairmen of Health Authorities on 9th June requesting their views on proposals for an improved disputes procedure in the National Health Service.
§ Lord CARR of HADLEYMy Lords, I think that we all agree that this is an extremely important matter. The noble Lord says that discussions are continuing. I am not quite clear what is the nature of these discussions. Are all the parties involved in this matter taking part in the discussions? I have in mind the various Royal colleges, the trade unions, and the other people involved. Have they yet 936 met together, or is it at the moment simply a matter of the Secretary of State writing to them all and asking for reactions? A month seems rather a long time just to have reached that stage.
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for giving me an opportunity of speaking more fully on this matter; I try to keep the Answers as brief as I can. The Secretary of State saw a number of people representing the various groups that make up the National Health Service. Since then he has charged the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Services to chair a committee which is made up of representatives of the British Medical Association, the Royal College of Nursing, the Royal College of Midwives, and the four trade unions involved; namely, COHSE, NUPE. NALGO, and ASTMS. They have met, and they are meeting again tonight.
This meeting is not as a result of the noble Lord's Question; it was arranged two or three weeks ago. They are trying to arrive at a formula which would improve the procedures for dealing with disputes, and which would cover all the disputes which are likely to arise. This approach is being based on past disputes in the National Health Service. If they can come to some agreement on what the procedures should be, recommendations will be made to the Whitley Council. As the noble Lord will know better than I know, the Whitley Council has certain responsibilities in some fields and none in the others. If the Whitley Council agree to the procedures they will be adopted by the Area Health Authorities; that is to say, by the employing authority in each district.
§ Lord CARR of HADLEYMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for those further details. As I understand it, a committee of the various representatives is now formed under the chairmanship of the Under-Secretary. I believe that that is the right way to proceed, and I should like to ask the noble Lord to do all he can to ensure that progress is as urgent and as speedy as possible.
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, this is the whole purpose of what is being done. We hope that eventually, when the procedures have been agreed, 937 if there is a dispute it can be dealt with at local level within, say, about 14 days.
§ Lord ROCHESTERMy Lords, would the Government consider whether, apart from the Health Service, the pay of people employed in certain other occupations that are vital to the immediate support of life should be determined by a single independent body, rather than by the various ad hoc committees that have been recently used for this purpose? Would not the establishment of such a body provide that continuity of policy which has, under successive Governments—first with the abolition of the Prices and Incomes Board, and then with the rejection of the Relativities Board—been recently so sadly lacking?
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, if I have understood the noble Lord correctly, he is concentrating on the question of the pay structure. There are established panels and groups which are already dealing with that matter. There is the Doctors' and Dentists' Review Body and, with regard to the ordinary employees in the National Health Service, there is the Whitley Council. The whole object of the committee which I have already mentioned to the noble Lord, Lord Carr of Hadley, and to the House, is to deal with all those matters which are rather "non-Whitley", and not those which are to do with pay structure, which applies overall.
§ Lord SEGALMy Lords, does my noble friend agree that the crucial issue in these discussions centres on the right of hospital staffs to strike? Can he say whether, in the midst of these discussions, any conclusion has yet been reached on that aspect of the problem?
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, to the best of my knowledge there has not been any discussion at all at this stage on whether it is right that people in the public service—and this is what it comes down to—should have the right to strike. I believe that the country as a whole has accepted that people have the right to withdraw their labour if they wish. However, in reply to my noble friend, so far as I know the point he raises has not been considered. I do not know 938 whether it will be considered, but I shall certainly convey to my right honourable friend the remarks that have been made.
Baroness WARD of NORTH TYNESIDEMy Lords, I fully support the Question asked by my noble friend Lord Carr of Hadley, and I received some satisfaction from the Answer given by the noble Lord opposite. Can the noble Lord kindly say how, with all these very important inquiries going on, we in the House will know what is to happen? Can we be given some information while we are in Recess?
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, I have had two questions on this matter in less than a month, and I do not think that your Lordships would allow my Department not to report on this matter in one form or another. With regard to the question of giving information to your Lordships during the Recess, I think that we must face the fact that the matter under discussion will take some time. There are many points to be considered. It is important that the formula arrived at should be the right formula. Many interests are involved, and so we must bear in mind that it may take longer than the period of the Summer Recess to arrive at the right kind of formula. I should be very glad if, upon our return after the Recess, a noble Lord tables a Question for me to answer.
§ Lord PORRITTMy Lords, would the Minister be able to say, on behalf of Her Majesty's Government, that in such a dispute the doctors, without taking any part in the actual dispute, should, with the representatives of the unions and others concerned, immediately form a local committee to safeguard patients?
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, as I pointed out, the whole purpose of this exercise is to bring in everybody who is engaged in the National Health Service. I am tempted to say—and I think I must say it—that it is all very well to talk about the doctors safeguarding the position of patients, but the consultants worked to rule for eight months in 1976 and the junior hospital doctors worked to rule for five months. There was not so much bother then about the needs of patients.