Eye Tests: Proposed Charges (Hansard, 21 March 1988)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Security (Lord Skelmersdale)
My Lords, the Government have proposed that, while sight tests provided under the National Health Service should remain free, patients who can afford to do so should obtain their tests privately. Clause 10 of the Health and Medicines Bill, which will shortly come before the House, will give effect to this proposal. The resources released by this change will enable us to develop preventive measures in other priority areas of primary care.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the Government are putting financial ability in front of and above the word "compassion"? Is he not also aware that after certain operations and certain afflictions routine eye-testing in order to effect detection of a disease—for example, diabetes—is vital? Is the noble Lord really saying that if a person is a border case after an operation and the ophthalmic surgeon feels there is a need for continual eye tests, or if a person suffering from a disease such as diabetes needs regular eye tests, and is deemed to be able to afford it but cannot, he will just have to suffer? Is that the Government's policy?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, the noble Lord has slightly misunderstood the position. National Health Service sight tests are carried out under the National Health Service Act 1977 either as part of the general ophthalmic service arrangements which family practitioner committees make with ophthalmic opticians and ophthalmic medical practitioners or as part of the hospital eye service. In the cases cited by him the tests will continue to be done under the National Health Service.

§ Lord Ennals
My Lords, further to the noble Lord's replies, can he give a guarantee that the Government will not introduce compulsory charges for eye tests 10 under the NHS? Is he aware that roughly 1 million people are referred to opticians for treatment as a result of such sight tests? Is he further aware that a recent MORI poll showed that 80 per cent. of the public are opposed to the introduction of charges? Can he give some assurance that that will not be done the next time round?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, the Government's policy in this area, like many other parts of their policy, is that those people who can afford to pay and who fall outside the exempt categories should do so. There is not much difference between that position and, for example, the prescription service, which the noble Lord knows well.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is not the noble Lord aware that the professional bodies covering ophthalmic surgeons and opticians are totally united in their view that the present system should not be interfered with? A person's eyesight is too valuable to be subject to any financial test. Would he be gracious enough to convey those views to the Secretary of State? Will the Government consider abolishing their peculiar attitude of adopting this odd animus to the professional bodies within our National Health Service?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I do not need to convey those thoughts to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Social Services because the professionals have already made him well aware of them. However, I should like to make the point that patients will still need to obtain a prescription for their glasses and therefore will still have their eyes checked regularly. There are no plans to change the existing type of test, which of course is all-important where the detection of glaucoma, cancers and other diseases of the eye might be thrown up.