HL Deb 13 May 1986 vol 474 cc1034-5

2.49 p.m.

Lord Campbell of Croy

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 they will take action to preserve essential functions and services at the Maudsley Hospital in any reorganisation that may be in prospect.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Security (Baroness Trumpington)

My Lords, I understand that the special health authority which manages the Maudsley and the Associated Bethlem Royal Hospital has over-spent its budget and has recently made proposals designed to contain this over-spending. I am also aware of the concern that has been expressed by members of the public, the press, staff and patients about some of these proposals, but I must emphasise that proposals for rationalisation of clinical services are still in the process of discussion.

Lord Campbell of Croy

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for her reply. Bearing in mind the enlightening series of articles in The Times newspaper earlier this year on mental illness and on schizophrenia in particular, will she try to ensure that the unsurpassed work that has been carried out by this hospital continues without interruption or limitation?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, the services provided at the Maudsley and Royal Bethlem Hospitals are of national, indeed international, importance. It is a centre of excellence and we are anxious to see the further development of its role both as a provider of services and in support of the excellent teaching and research functions of the associated Institute of Psychiatry. The Government have no plans to alter the status of this or any other of the postgraduate special health authorities.

Lord Ennals

My Lords, I greatly welcome the statement just made by the noble Baroness concerning the value of this great centre of excellence, the Maudsley Hospital. However, is she aware that the proposed cuts in clinical services are precisely in those categories which the Government claim to give highest priorities—disturbed adolescents, mentally ill children, drug addicts, alcoholics, and those suffering from brain damage and cancer of the brain? Is she aware that these cuts in clinical services will also have a great effect on research and on training? Does she not feel that the department must stop this happening; otherwise we shall see another centre of excellence cease to be a world-wide centre of excellence?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, with regard to the curtailment of services, I understand that no decisions have yet been made except in the case of neurosurgery, where short-term closures have been agreed on an experimental basis. For the information of the House I would point out that I understand that at its meeting last night the SHA decided on the first phase of a series of measures and will enter into discussions with staff on a second phase of measures to be introduced in the months to come. The authority has also expressed the wish to discuss its future financial allocations with my right honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State of Health. He will be visiting the hospitals later this week.

Lord Ennals

My Lords, the noble Baroness referred to other fields but can she explain why there seems to be no change in neurosurgery? I understand from my visit to the Maudsley yesterday that there has been an increase of 250 per cent. in the waiting lists for beds in the neurological unit. Some of those are extremely urgent cases. Surely that ought to be included among the issues that should be postponed. Is she aware that it is not only the Maudsley that is in peril? If she looks at this evening's Standard, she will see that the main teaching hospitals in Britain are also in peril.

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, with regard to neurosurgery, the noble Lord will recall that I have just said that no decisions were made on curtailment of services except in the case of neurosurgery, where short-term closures have been agreed. The valuable neurological services provided by the Maudsley on behalf of the South-East Thames region and others will continue at the present level while future services are examined. The consultant neurosurgeons have given an assurance that the closure of the unit now proposed for six weeks in the summer and two weeks at Christmas will not affect patient services, but this will be closely monitored by the SHA. I am assured that alternative arrangements will be made for any emergency arising during the closure period.