Dental Services for the Armed Forces (Hansard, 15 January 1987)

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

§ The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Lord Glenarthur)
My Lords, as a result of a recent trial we have concluded that the main requirement for the provision of dental appliances should be met by commercial laboratories, while a certain number of uniformed dental technicians should be retained to meet an important war role. Twenty-two civilian dental technicians were therefore informed on 7th October that they were to be made redundant, although special efforts are being made to find them alternative jobs in other specialisations.

§ Lord Graham of Edmonton
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. However, is he aware that the trade unions concerned—namely, the IPCS and USDAW—have received representations from their members stating that the savings which are alleged to be made in the proposals are not cost-effective and will result in a diminution in the quality of the service? Why have the Government refused to allow sight of this trial report to those who are most affected—the dental technicians who have been dismissed as a result of a review in which they were not involved and who were not consulted about the matter during its compilation?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, the important point is that the review was extremely thorough. It covered some 6,500 cases, and an analysis of the results confirmed that commercial laboratories could undertake the main tasks with a reduction in overall costs. It is important that in matters such as this costs are carefully scrutinised.

§ Lord Graham of Edmonton
My Lords, do we not have the worst of all worlds? There is to be a traumatic change, allegedly to save public money, but it will cost more, and there is no evidence to back up the need for it. The Minister has seen the evidence. The trial report has been produced but those who are affected have not seen it. Is the Minister aware that I have details in my possession, as he must have, of eight of the individuals 634 who are affected and have been dismissed? They have a total of 101 years of service in uniform and collectively 116 years service as dental technicians. Many of them rendered relief to the wounded in the Falklands. Is it not a disgrace that such individuals are treated in this way? Is the Minister aware of the case of a Mr. B. Finch, who has given a total of 32 years' public service? He tells me that the warrant officer who will replace him will cost £20,000 in capitation, while his salary is only £10,000, and his replacement will have service commitments as well. Will the Minister be prepared at least to consider making the report available to convince those who are losing their jobs in this disgraceful way?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, no one disputes the valuable service to the Armed Forces which these people have provided. I am afraid that I cannot go into individual cases now, but I think that the operational needs of the service must remain paramount, and putting out this work to contract, which effectively is what has been done, was the cheapest option. As I said, the operational requirement dictated that 92 uniformed technicians had to be retained to meet identified war appointments in medical support. There is therefore no basis for a reconsideration of the case of these civilian dental technicians.

§ Lord Graham of Edmonton
My Lords, will the Minister tell us whether he has the view of the heads of the three services and of the people involved in dentistry? I wonder whether they actually wanted this change, or has the whole motivation for it simply been one of reducing public costs and, more importantly, reducing the size of the role of civil servants?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, as I said, the trial was to see whether or not the work could be done more effectively and cheaply in another way. What has come out of the working party report is that it can be done better and more cheaply in the way that is being suggested. The important point to bear in mind is that some uniformed dental technicians will need to be retained because of the war role.