§ Sir J. D. REESasked the Secretary to the Treasury how many circulars were issued to medical practitioners containing a copy of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's letter of 18th December addressed to the secretaries of the Insurance Act Practitioners' Association?
§ Mr. MASTERMANMy right hon. Friend addressed the letter in question to the secretaries of the National Insurance Practitioners' Association. I have no information as to any circulation which the recipients of the letter may have given to it.
427W
§ Mr. WATTasked the Secretary to the Treasury what steps he proposes to take to permit of insured persons making use of the services of their own doctor in the case where the doctor has conscientious objections to going on the panel?
§ Mr. MASTERMANI do not understand to what kind of objection the hon. Member refers.
§ Mr. WATTalso asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been called to posters, leaflets, and pamphlets issued and signed by medical practitioners in Scotland dealing with the administration of the National Insurance I Act, and advertising the terms on which they are willing to perform outside of the panel similar duties to those undertaken by doctors on the panel in respect of insured persons; and, if so, whether it is proposed that payment be made from State funds to those doctors?
§ Mr. MASTERMANThe answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. No contributions from insurance funds towards the cost of the medical treatment of persons who are attended by doctors not on the panel will be made except under the conditions stated in my answer to the hon. Member for St. Pancras on the 6th instant.
§ Mr. SNOWDENasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many women doctors have joined the insurance panels; and if insured women, who desire to be attended by a woman doctor where there is a resident woman doctor, but where no woman doctor is on the panel, can make their own arrangements with the woman doctor and receive the equivalent grant from the approved society?
§ Mr. MASTERMANI could not answer the first part of the hon. Member's question until an examination had been made of the panel lists of 196 different committees, and I do not feel that the labour would be justified at the present time seeing that additional doctors are joining the panels every day. With regard to the second part of the question, as I have previously stated, it would be the duty, in the first instance, of the insurance committees upon application to consider the circumstances of each particular case.
Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANSasked whether, in view of the fact that under Section 15 (2) (e) of the National Insurance Act there is an obligation on the 428W Insurance committees to provide medical benefit for old members of friendly societies who do not become insured persons on the same terms of remuneration as those arranged for insured persons, he will say whether arrangements are being made by the insurance committees to provide medical benefit for old members of friendly societies who do not become insured persons; whether these members will be charged not more than 6s. for their medical benefit; and whether the additional 2s. 6d. will be granted in respect of them?
§ Mr. MASTERMANThe answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and to the second and third parts in the negative. The arrangements made give an option to societies, and are not obligatory upon them. I have no evidence to show that the fact that doctors on the panels are receiving a larger remuneration than hitherto in respect of insured person is necessitating an expenditure upon uninsured persons of a much higher fee than that for which they have been treated in the past.
§ Mr. GLAZEBROOKasked the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to a circular issued by the Post Office authorities on 31st December, 1912, to medical officers of post offices to the effect that the conditions of their service hitherto in force would be superseded by the arrangements for medical benefit under the National Insurance Act; whether he is aware that a further circular was addressed to the same medical officers by the same authorities on 13th January, 1913, stating that the Insurance Commissioners were prepared to recognise the Post Office medical system as an institution in the sense defined by Section 15 (4) of the National Insurance Act, and indicating that the effect of this would be that, contrary to the statement of 31st December, the conditions of service of Post Office medical officers would continue as before, the only difference being that Post Office officials would, if they applied to exercise their right of free choice of doctor, be able to receive their medical benefit from another doctor, provided he was on the panel; will he say what was the object of sending these contradictory circulars; and whether the intention of applying for the recognition of the Post Office medical system as an institution was only conceived between the dates of the two circulars; and was the object of the first circular to force the Post Office 429W medical officers to join the panels under the impression that the Post Office medical System, and with it the appointments thereto, was at an end?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELIn the Circular of the 31st December, Post Office medical officers were informed that the approval of the Insurance Commissioners was being sought for the Post Office medical system; and they were told that, if such approval were not forthcoming, insured post Office servants would be limited in their choice of medical attendants to doctors on the panels. In the circular of the 13th January medical officers were informed that the Insurance Commissioners were prepared to approve the Post Office medical system. I see no contradiction between the two circulars. The answer in the last two parts of the question is in the negative.