HL Deb 08 March 1984 vol 449 cc364-5

3.20 p.m.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether statistics of the numbers of unemployed doctors are to be collected now that they do not have to register by profession at unemployment benefit offices.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Security (Lord Glenarthur)

No, my Lords. We see no need to collect them as we have no evidence of significant medical unemployment at the moment.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord the Minister for that admission. Of course, the Government have no evidence because they do not collect the figures. Is the noble Lord aware that the British Medical Association feels very strongly on this subject, since doctors are no longer allowed to register as being unemployed as doctors, and wishes to know the numbers so that it may gauge the problem and be able to help its members and also the National Health Service? Therefore, is the noble Lord not prepared to consider the matter?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, I am aware that in July 1982 the Hospital Junior Staff Committee carried out a survey, although I believe that the results were never published. The estimate of 2,000 unemployed doctors attributed to the survey was subsequently denied by the BMA. I can tell the noble Lord that I understand that a further survey is to be carried out by the BMA juniors this year.

Lord Morris

My Lords, surely it is for the unemployed doctors to inform the BMA of the fact rather than for the BMA to use the Department of Employment as an information collecting centre?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, I have no doubt that they do exactly that.

Lord Ennals

My Lords, would the noble Lord the Minister care to comment on the report in The Times yesterday that the Secretary of State for Social Services is studying ways of limiting the number of doctors in general practice, including those with list sizes of between 1,700 and 2,100? Is he aware that such action was recommended, not by the Medical Practices Committee but by Binder Hamlyn, a firm of accountants? Is he further aware that not only would such action be against the interests of the public, who rely very much on their general practitioners, but it would also be much resented in the medical profession if the judgment of a statutory body were to be overruled?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, Ministers are studying the Binder Hamlyn report at the moment, and there is nothing more that I can say about it.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, is the Minister aware that the BMA feels strongly about this matter simply because it wishes to gauge the extent of unemployment among doctors? As the noble Lord has said, it is probably true that the majority of those involved are junior doctors, but it does not mean to say that because they are junior doctors it does not matter. In fact, I am reliably informed that the problem of unemployment goes right the way up, and even some consultants are unemployed. Should there not be sensible co-operation between either the BMA and the DHSS or the BMA and the Department of Employment? The sole purpose of asking this Question is in the hope of getting sensible co-operation between the Government and the BMA.

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, there is of course sensible discussion between the BMA and the department. In the department we already collect a large range of statistics relevant to the planning and control of medical manpower, and in particular to help in projecting the supply of and demand for doctors. We are reviewing the entire range of information collected; but at present, as I have said, we see no need to collect additional statistics.

Lord Ennals

My Lords, I am most grateful to the noble Lord for saying that Ministers are considering the recommendations of the Binder Hamlyn report, but can he give the House any indication at all as to when decisions will be taken and, if so, whether any Statement will come before your Lordships' House? It would be a matter of very great concern if the Government were to limit the growth of the general practitioner service.

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, I am not able to give the noble Lord any indication of timescale. As for a Statement, that is of course a matter for my right honourable friend and the usual channels.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, I must press the point. Is the noble Lord aware that we are not asking for something new but simply, on behalf of the BMA, that the practice which existed for many years and which was very useful should now be reinstated in the interests of the Government, of doctors and, generally, of our National Health Service?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, as I understand it the statistics, and the split among the various groups that might be unemployed, are no longer collected in the way that they were. This, of course, is a matter which more directly affects my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Employment, but nevertheless, as I said, the DHSS is involved in it. I am sure that my right honourable friend will note the noble Lord's comments, but I very much doubt whether anything can be done about the matter.