§ Mr. Goodhewasked the Secretary of State for Defence whether he will make a further statement in regard to the recommendations of the National Board for Prices and Incomes about the remuneration of service doctors.
§ Mr. HealeyI believe that it is right that the Board's Report should have established the principle that the pay of Service doctors should be equated with the average earnings of general practitioners. Not only has this resulted in a substantial immediate increase, very much in excess of the normal incomes policy ceiling; it will also guarantee that the pay of Service doctors remains in step with future movements of pay in civilian life.
The Board does not believe that limitations on Service doctors in their professional careers are sufficiently distinctive to justify retention of the explicit 15 per cent. lead formerly enjoyed by Service doctors in comparison with the National Health Service general practitioner. I appreciate that this is bound 28W to be disappointing. On the other hand in April, 1970, doctors and dentists, in common with other Servicemen, will be paid a "military salary" which takes account of the so-called "X" factor. The "X" factor will be designed to compensate all Servicemen, including doctors and dentists, for their liability to danger, turbulence and the adverse balance of Service conditions of employment generally, as compared with those prevailing in civilian life.
The hon. Member has asked me to clarify my reference in my reply of 16th June to free accommodation and rations for Service doctors for the next 12 months. I was, of course, referring to single men. Under the existing pay code they are paid less than married men; and to the extent that they receive free accommodation and rations they are paid less than general practitioners. This situation will continue until the pay of the single man is raised to the same level as that of the married man as the result of the introduction of the military salary in a year's time.
In my reply to the hon. Member on 16th June, I was reported as suggesting that civilian general practitioners were overpaid. I certainly did not mean to imply anything of the kind. What I meant to say was that Service doctors are regarded as being underpaid in relation to the nature of their work, when the Board examined their problems. General practitioners deserve what they earn as much as, and perhaps more than, the members of all other professions. This increases my satisfaction that the worth of the Service doctor should be no less adequately regarded than that of general practitioners.—[Vol. 785, c. 43–44.]