Armed Forces Medical Advisory Board (Hansard, 15 November 1984)

§ Lord Hunter of Newington
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces (Lord Trefgarne)
My Lords, the armed forces Medical Advisory Board has rendered most valuable service during its lifetime and I should like to place on record our appreciation of the work it has done, particularly in helping to unify attitudes, standards and training between the three services. In the light of the creation of a unified medical headquarters structure in the Ministry of Defence, and the many informal links which exist at all levels between the defence medical services and the civilian sector, we believe that there is no longer a need for this particular advisory board.

§ Lord Hunter of Newington
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer. Is he aware that there is grave concern about the recruitment of doctors of quality to the service, and also that there is a particular problem concerning specialist training within the services? How is it considered that these matters will be dealt with in the future?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I am aware that there is some concern felt about these matters. We believe that in the fullness of time these concerns will prove to be unnecessary. In regard to recruitment, for instance, the recent figures are very good indeed, and time will tell whether we can maintain this position.

§ Lord Boston of Faversham
My Lords, will the noble Lord bear in mind that there is unanimity of view, not only among the members of the board, but also among the presidents and deans comprising the conference of colleges, that there should be the fullest co-operation among the Ministry of Defence, the royal colleges and the Department of Health and Social Security to ensure that the quality of doctors in the armed forces is maintained at the highest level in the world; and that they are also unanimous in their view that the abolition of the board would be a retrograde step? Will he invite his right honourable friend to have another look at this and to hold open the possibility of resurrecting the board?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I am aware of the view of the distinguished people to whom the noble Lord referred, not least from the letter in The Times which appeared this morning. The noble Lord, Lord Smith, wrote to me at some length on this matter recently and I am studying what he said most carefully.

§ Lord Leatherland
My Lords, is it still the custom of army doctors to hand out the No. 9 pill to their patients?

§ Lord Trefgarne
Happily, my Lords, those days are now past.

§ Lord Smith
My Lords, does the Minister appreciate fully that among the servicemen wounded in the Falklands war and operated on along the lines supported by the medical board, mortality was nil? Does he seriously advise the abolition of this very successful board, with no body to replace it?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I am, of course, aware of the outstanding service of the defence medical services during the Falklands campaign. The noble Lord, Lord Smith, has written to me on these matters, and I hope that he will allow me to consider what he has said and reply to him in due course.

Lord Richardson
My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he can tell the House the cost of the board, membership of which is entirely voluntary? Furthermore, may I ask him whether he appreciates that the members of that board not only represented all the specialties of medicine but also nursing, and indeed the chief medical officer of the Department of Health attended; and that those board members were men who had taken special care and trouble to study and understand in detail the problems of the armed forces medical services, and were not just a collection of distinguished academics or specialists? Can he assure the House that the savings on the abolition of this board can be justified by the loss of a unique and entirely unchallenged source of advice—unique and unchallenged in the experience of the armed forces medical services?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I cannot pretend that financial considerations were paramount in this decision. Of course they were not. As the noble Lord rightly says, the members of the board received no remuneration and so the cost to the Ministry of Defence was very small indeed. The important thing is 413 that we believe that under the new arrangements, which my right honourable friend announced a few months ago, the need for this body will disappear. But that is not to say that we have closed minds on this matter. As I said earlier, I shall be considering most carefully the observations which the noble Lord, Lord Smith, put to me recently.

§ Lord Hunter of Newington
My Lords, because of the interest in this House on this important matter, does the Minister accept that it should not be dealt with merely by a Written Answer to the noble Lord, Lord Smith?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, if the noble Lord means by that my replying to correspondence from the noble Lord, it is clearly my duty to reply to the letter which he sent me. I have no doubt that he will see fit to circulate my reply in an appropriate way.

Lord Taylor
My Lords, are we to understand then that the Minister has withdrawn his original Answer?

§ Lord Trefgarne
No, my Lords, I cannot mislead the noble Lord by answering in the affirmative to that supplementary question. As I said in the main reply, we do not believe that the continuation of the original body in the form that it was would be appropriate. But the noble Lord, Lord Smith, has put some new ideas to us which I should like to consider.

Lord Taylor
My Lords, might it not be wiser to see whether experience shows that the board is unnecessary rather than to abolish it in advance?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, we are entering upon a new era in the central organisation of the Ministry of Defence, not least so far as the medical services within it are concerned. I think that it was right to proceed as we did with the cessation of the task of the original board and consideration of what new arrangements might be appropriate.