Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham (Hansard, 24 May 1988)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Security (Lord Skelmersdale)
My Lords, the 10 per cent. reduction in workload related solely to the in-patients at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital and not to the Central Birmingham District Health Authority as a whole. I understand that the savings from the temporary bed closures at the hospital, effected in September last year, are approximately £10,000 per month.

§ The Countess of Mar
My Lords, does the noble Lord agree that this amount is about one-half of 1 per cent. in savings at that hospital and that the cancer ward at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital suffered a 39 per cent. reduction? Does he think that it is cost-effective and efficient for patients from Kidderminster, for example, to have to self-administer their drugs before they have treatment and for them to have to get a taxi to go to and from the hospital because they are too ill to travel by public transport? Is it right that patients should be transferred to Stoke-on-Trent, which is a 90-mile round trip from Birmingham, every day for four to five weeks for treatment and that the waiting list has increased from four weeks to eight weeks for cancer treatment?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, the ordered reductions were across the whole range of specialties. I can advise the noble Countess that the reduction in workload across the hospital as a whole was 7.1 per cent. The 10 per cent. has not been reached. As regards cost-effectiveness, this is a matter jointly for the hospital authorities and for the clinicians themselves.

§ Lord Ennals
My Lords, is it conceivable that the Secretary of State or indeed the Minister could have given his approval to a decision by a district health authority simply to make a ruthless overall cut in the work of one of its hospitals? Is he aware that this cut is due to continue for a total of 12 months regardless of the consequences for patients? Does he agree with that?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, that is the most extraordinary definition of a cut that I have ever encountered. Central Birmingham is most certainly getting more money. This year central Birmingham's budget is £92.2 million. That is a 5.6 per cent. cash increase over last year and a real terms increase of 13 per cent. since 1982–83.

§ Lord Ennals
My Lords, if the health authority requires a 10 per cent. cut in its workload, is not that a cut in its workload?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, in 1986–87 activity in central Birmingham reached levels that were not planned until the early 1990s. In other words, the authority was in danger of breaking the law by not making ends meet. This was made worse by the fact that the district treats an unusually high proportion of difficult and therefore expensive cases. I would point out that over the district as a whole there has been a 9 per cent. increase in patient treatments between 1982 and 1987. I regard that as a success story.

§ Earl Russell
My Lords, will the noble Lord consider looking again at the actuarial basis of these figures, because outside government circles they carry very limited conviction?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, they do not for anybody who has been treated in central Birmingham in the years that I have mentioned.

§ Lord Hunter of Newington
My Lords, will the Minister please tell the House whether the Government still have every confidence in the management of the West Midlands health authority and in the central district authority?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
Yes, my Lords. The Government have every confidence in the management. The management themselves realise that there is a slightly imperfect world as regards health in that part of the country. That is why they are reviewing the situation. The Government look forward to the results of that review.

§ Baroness Robson of Kiddington
My Lords, perhaps I may ask the Minister what he would do in the circumstances in which the regional health authority finds itself in Birmingham. I am quoting from the Birmingham Post of May 12th when the general manager, Mr. Ken Bailes, admitted that the authority had firm requests for projects totalling more than £15 million. It has £3.6 million to spend on those projects. Would the Minister like to tell us what his priorities would be?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, they would certainly not be increasing patient treatments at a greater rate than there is money available to do so. As regards the West Midlands Regional Health Authority as a whole, substantial increases in funding have enabled the region to treat 24 per cent. more in-patients, 17 per cent. more out-patients and 79 per cent. more day cases than in 1978.

§ The Countess of Mar
My Lords, how can the noble Lord justify that statement when he said on 23rd March in the debate of the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, that it was patients who mattered to Her Majesty's Government, and not beds?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, none of the answers that I have given this afternoon would, I believe, lead me to contradict that statement or those thoughts. I have been talking about patient treatments throughout. It is the noble Countess who has been talking about beds.

§ Lady Kinloss
My Lords, is the Minister satisfied that the money released to reduce the waiting list for urology in central Birmingham was used as effectively as it should have been, in view of the bed closures and the reduced number of theatre sessions which had already been arranged?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I know that waiting lists for urology cases in central Birmingham have been reduced substantially. I do not have the details at the moment. I shall write to the noble Lady.

§ Lord Leatherland
My Lords, perhaps I may ask the Minister whether he is aware that Birmingham is a nice city which has produced some very distinguished people.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
Yes, my Lords; and they are particularly well treated.

§ Lord Harvington
My Lords, will the noble Lord remember that Birmingham is perhaps the best governed city in England?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, that is an interesting point of view.