§ 11.27 a.m.
§ Lord Hatch of LusbyMy 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 what action they are taking to avoid putting hospital patients' lives at risk through lack of funds.
The Earl of CaithnessMy Lords, we do not accept the suggestion that hospital patients' lives have been or will be put at risk because of lack of funds.
§ Lord Hatch of LusbyMy Lords, has the noble Lord had his attention drawn to the surveys produced by the baby life support systems and by Dr. Colin Walker of Dundee, both of which show a very grave shortfall in the number of intensive care cot units in a number of hospitals, including University College Hospital in London and King's College Hospital in London? Is he aware that these surveys show that babies are being turned away at a rate of between five and 20 a week 347 and that it is supposed by the doctors that many of them die because there are not the care cots available to keep them alive?
The Earl of CaithnessMy Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Hatch, has done it again. He asks me a very general first Question about an industry that has been financed by this Government to a record sum of £171/2 billion, employing something like a million whole-time staff. He then asks me a very detailed question about intensive care cot units. Perhaps I may provide a Written Answer to him and I will put a copy in the Library.
§ Lord Nugent of GuildfordMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that this Question on the Order Paper has a clear implication that lives are being put at risk by the National Health Service? Is he aware that this is a very offensive Question, both to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State and indeed to the whole health service? Is he aware that, on the figures of the financial provision by this Government, in the coming year £17 billion is to be devoted to the National Health Service compared with £71/2, billion in the last year of the Labour Government? Even allowing for the cost of living increase, is that not a very substantial increase? Is my noble friend aware that, if there is any substance in the offensive Question of the noble Lord, it reflects on his own Government, the then Labour Government?
The Earl of CaithnessMy Lords, I am very grateful to my noble friend for his question. I would also confirm that the increase that we have given to the National Health Service is 20 per cent. in real terms.
§ Lord EnnalsMy Lords, contrary to the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Nugent, is not the noble Earl aware that there is increasing public concern about the state of the health service, the threatened closure of vital specialist units and the level of waiting lists, which are now averaging roughly 100,000 more than during the period of the previous Government? Does the noble Earl accept that taking into consideration the inbuilt growth of demand, partly due of course to the ageing population, the theorectical efficiency cuts and the increased charges, the actual growth rate is negligible—
§ Lord EnnalsI am asking a question, my Lords, I am asking a question to the extent that the noble Lord was. Our progress would be a little more rapid if I was allowed to ask that question and to get an answer to it. In view of the circumstances, is not the real increase virtually nil and for some of the RAWP deficient areas actually nil?
The Earl of CaithnessMy Lords, I disagree entirely with the noble Lord's last statement. We discussed this matter fully on 13th February, as he will recall. The Government's position was put clearly before the House. As to closures, the noble Lord knows a lot about closures. He closed 272 hospitals in the five years that he was in charge of the health service. With 348 regard to waiting lists—another of his supplementaries—the latest figures for September 1984, which are still provisional, show that at 682,000—
§ Lord EnnalsA disgraceful figure, my Lords.
The Earl of CaithnessMy Lords, the waiting list is some 22,000 fewer than it was in September 1983 and some 70,000 fewer than it was at the peak of 752,000 when the noble Lord was in office.
§ Lord Boyd-CarpenterMy Lords, can my noble friend say whether it would not be more in accordance with the sensible practice of this House if noble Lords who have doubts about the adequacy of the provision for the National Health Service were to table a Motion for debate? They could then put their points and have them answered, rather than put down a general Question and, without notice, try to spring a particular example of an alarming nature on a Minster who cannot conceivably be expected to give an answer to it.
The Earl of CaithnessMy Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. We had a very good debate, as I have said, on 13th February. We would welcome another. Our record is extremely good and is better than that of any other Government.
Lord Wallace of CoslanyMy Lords, is the noble Earl aware that, as this is a health Question, Members of the House and myself would welcome the services of an experienced nurse on the Government Front Bench?
§ Lord Hatch of LusbyMy Lords, will the noble Earl accept that there was no trickery in the Question? When it was originally put down it included points such as that concerning the closure or the threatened closure of the cardiac unit at Guy's Hospital, which has subsequently been answered. Nor is there any party point—
§ Lord Hatch of LusbyMy Lords, what I am trying to discover is whether the department is conscious of the facts—I have given only one example—regarding children's intensive care cot units. Is it not the case that, according to medical evidence, there are patients who are losing their lives because there is not the financing of what is a new process? Whereas previously premature babies were expected to die, with the new process, which needs new money, there is now the opportunity to keep them alive. Will not the noble Earl accept—and will he further investigate the point—that this is a facility which any Government, of any political nature, should now be financing in order to save these lives?
The Earl of CaithnessMy Lords, on that detailed point, I have said that I shall write to the noble Lord. We are putting the care of the patient first. That is why we are spending record sums and increasing manpower.
Lord Campbell of CroyMy Lords, with reference to some remarks made about experience, is my noble friend aware that many of us have noticed that in the few months that he has been sitting on the Front Bench he has given admirable answers to a whole range of questions on many subjects?
§ Lord ParryMy Lords, regardless of politics and forgetting what has gone before, will the noble Earl assure us that he is in touch with those agencies which carefully monitor and are deeply concerned about the treatment of babies immediately before and immediately after birth? Will he give the assurance that he is studying with them all the implications of the development of the health service so that it can properly serve both the unborn and newly born child?
The Earl of CaithnessIndeed, my Lords, I can confirm that the department is in regular touch with a whole range of organisations.
§ Lord Nugent of GuildfordMy Lords, on a lighter note, will my noble friend agree that it might be an improvement if Questions framed in the form of "Have you stopped beating your wife?" were regarded as out of order?
§ Lord Campbell of AllowayMy Lords, is my noble friend the Minister aware that there really is no case on record where it has ever been proven that death has occurred through lack of funds?
§ Lord Campbell of AllowayMy Lords, one can say what one wishes; it has never been established.
§ Lord ShinwellMy Lords, will the Minister—
§ Lord BelsteadMy Lords, I think that perhaps—
§ Lord ShinwellI am not making a speech, my Lords.
§ Lord BelsteadMy Lords, I think that perhaps Question Time has gone long enough and that we might move on to the next business.
§ Lord ShinwellMy Lords, may I ask a question?
§ Lord BelsteadMy Lords, the noble Lord is held in great affection in the House. I think, however, that we have had long enough on Questions. I think that it would be the sense of the House that we move on to the next business.
§ Lord ShinwellNo hooliganism, my Lords!