| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Fisher : I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that interesting and intriguing intervention.
Labour Members do not believe that the Department of Trade and Industry is the best Department to deal with the newspaper industry, because, like broadcasting, it is not just another industry but a key element in the culture and communications of our society. The public agenda, values, traditions, and ideas of our society are sustained and carried by the press, so it must not be dealt with like textiles or other industries. It is essentially a cultural industry and should be so handled.
For the same reasons the Labour party is concerned that the Home Office is involved in the Bill. A Department that has
responsibilities for prisons, probation and the control of immigration is not the appropriate Department to ensure the right of reply.
I share many of the concerns that were expressed passionately and eloquently by my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore), when he went through the Government's disgraceful record on editorial interference in programmes such as "Real Lives" and "My Country Right or Wrong", the injunctions on the BBC's "Death on the Rock" and the refusal to accept the Windlesham report. There was also
Column 625
their pressure through injunctions on The Guardian, The Independent and other newspapers, which is relevant to the Bill.Mr. Renton : I greatly resent those ridiculous remarks. Does the hon. Gentleman not realise that it is because of our wish to protect the freedom of the press that we have been carefully neutral on this Bill and the Protection of Privacy Bill despite the support for them from Members of all parties? We are anxious that there should be no statutory control of the press.
Mr. Fisher : The Government are incapable of protecting editorial independence in the press or broadcasting, so they do not recommend themselves as being likely to protect the rights of the public through the right of reply. The Government's record is against them. For the same reason I cannot agree with the hon. Member for Eastbourne who proposed that the matter should be dealt with by the Lord Chancellor's Department. We are dealing with issues of culture, communications, access, editorial independence, and freedom of speech and information. A Labour Government will set up a Ministry to deal with the arts and the media-- [Interruption.] We made it clear at the last general election that we would do that. The Ministry would have responsibility for the press and would be the most suitable Ministry for protecting editorial independence. Broadcasting, publishing and the press have issues such as access and editorial independence in common, but they have little in common with prisons, the probation service and immigration.
The next Labour Government will introduce a Bill dealing with the right of reply, although it will not be in precisely the same form as the present Bill. As my hon. Friend the Member for Clydebank and Milngavie has often said, he has tried to carry hon. Members of a wide range of opinions with him, so he has pared down the Bill
Column 626
to its essence. He has removed broadcasting, which is included in such legislation in many other European countries and he has removed other elements. The possible defeat of the Bill gives the Labour party time to consider afresh the form in which it will introduce a similar Bill when in government which other hon. Members will support. It will be part of a package that protects the consumer against the unbridled power of the press and protects editorial independence and the strength of journalists. We desperately need freedom of information legislation to protect the rights of journalists, just as we must protect the right of reply for individuals. The House has accepted the principle that the public have such a right of reply. Next, we must introduce such a Bill.Mr. Worthington : I want to express my appreciation to all the supporters of the Bill for the help that they have given. I also want to express my appreciation to the oppontents of the Bill. An enormous amount of help has been given to the framing of future legislation on the right of reply. We recognise the complexities of the issue, and Labour Members have a genuine addiction to a free press. I also welcome the Minister's statement that there is to be a review of matters of privacy and related issues. But I am sure that the Minister will recognise that his statement has rivalled any in the past in its vagueness about the remit of the review, and he made no statement on who was to chair it.
Let me conclude by emphasising the seriousness of this matter. Next week will be the first anniversary of the death of a young actor called David Scarboro who used to be in East Enders. His family, his fellow villagers and many of his colleagues on the cast of East Enders believe that his death was brought about largely by press harassment yet the News of the World and The Sun never acknowledged their part in the misery that that lad's life became. I hope that we shall remember cases like that as we wait for the Press Council to try to put its house in order.
It being half-past Two o'clock, the debate stood adjourned.
Column 627
Private Members' Bills
INTERNATIONAL PARLIAMENTARY ORGANISATIONS (REGISTRATIONS) BILL Order read for consideration in Committee.
Committee Friday 28 April.
LOTTERIES BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Madam Deputy Speaker : Not printed.
ABORTION (RIGHTS OF ANCILLARY WORKERS) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 5 May.
NATIONAL IDENTITY CARD BILL
Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Second Reading [10 February.]
Madam Deputy Speaker : Second Reading what day? No day named.
INSTALLATION OF SMOKE DETECTORS BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 5 May.
SCOTLAND BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Madam Deputy Speaker : Not moved.
FUEL AND ENERGY PROVISION BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 26 May.
PROTECTION OF RESIDENTS IN RETIREMENT HOMES BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 5 May.
HOUSING THE HOMELESS BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Madam Deputy Speaker : Not moved.
HOUSING ASSOCIATIONS (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 28 April.
FUNERAL INDUSTRY (CODE OF PRACTICE) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Column 628
Madam Deputy Speaker : Not moved.
LONDON GOVERNMENT BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Madam Deputy Speaker : Not moved.
JUNIOR HOSPITAL DOCTORS (REGULATION OF HOURS) BILL [Lords] Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 28 April.
COAL MINING SUBSIDENCE (DAMAGE, ARBITRATION, PREVENTION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 12 May.
RELIGIOUS PROSECUTIONS (ABOLITION) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 7 July.
INDECENT DISPLAYS (NEWSPAPERS AND WORKPLACES) BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 28 April.
AGE OF LEGAL CAPACITY (SCOTLAND) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Madam Deputy Speaker : Second Reading what day? No day named.
GAMING MACHINES (PROHIBITION ON USE BY PERSONS UNDER EIGHTEEN) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till 12 May
RIDERS OF EQUINE ANIMALS (WEARING OF PROTECTIVE HEADGEAR) BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 28 April.
COUNTING WOMEN'S UNREMUNERATED WORK BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Madam Deputy Speaker Second Reading what day? No day named.
Column 629
BRITISH RACING COMMISSION BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 12 May.
FOOTBALL SPECTATORS (No. 2) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 12 May.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Ordered,
That, at the sitting on Tuesday 25th April, the Motion in the name of Mr. Neil Kinnock relating to Health and Safety may be proceeded with, though opposed, for one and a half hours after it has been entered upon ; and if proceedings thereon have not been disposed of at the end of that period, Mr. Speaker shall then put the Question.-- [Mr. Alan Howarth.]
Column 630
Fullerton Hospital, Doncaster
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.-- [Mr. Alan Howarth.]
2.34 pm
Mr. Martin Redmond (Don Valley) : I am pleased to have this opportunity to draw to the attention of the House the disastrous consequences that the closure of Fullerton hospital will have for the local community. The importance of the matter is evidenced by the presence of so many hon. Friends. Fullerton hospital was built by the Denaby-Conisbrough community many years ago, to provide facilities for and to meet the demands of local people. Cadeby and Denaby pits were major contributors to the building of that hospital. However, when the National Health Service was created, the local community had no hesitation in seeing that Fullerton was a part of the service. The building has not had much spent on it in the past. Nevertheless, it is still a substantial building which has stood the test of time. It is surrounded by gardens, providing a healthy environment for patients in their twilight years. There was a need for Fullerton when it was built, and there is still a need for it now.
The two wards at Montagu hospital will not stand the test of time and will require substantial amounts of money spent on them if they are to remain in use in, possibly, 10 years. Also, Montagu hospital does not have the same environment as Fullerton.
Doncaster hospital has one of the lowest administration costs in the country. It has been and still is nurse-oriented, but, because of the way in which the Government funded the pay rise last year, Doncaster now has financial difficulties. If that were not so and if the Government had played the game with the health authority, I would not be making this case for Fullerton hospital this afternoon. By closing Fullerton hospital and thus reducing services, £100,000 will be saved to fulfil the previous commitment to Montagu hospital--robbing Peter to pay Paul, or hand-to-mouth short-term policies. I honestly believe that the long-term needs of the Doncaster area will be met only by long-term planning. If the authority did not have such financial problems, which are through no fault of its own, it would have opened a children's wing. Last week, I received a letter from the Minister, drawing my attention to this new development. But there is no money to staff it. Is the Minister suggesting that another old folks hospital such as Fullerton should be closed to get the money to provide the staff? The Cancer Trust in Doncaster is providing a hospice. Doncaster health authority cannot meet the promise on the staffing of it.
There is a cash crisis in Doncaster, and the closure of Fullerton will result in several premature deaths. The closure of Fullerton has no relation to the future needs of Doncaster. We must ask whether we are to provide love and care for our elderly or allow them to end their lives alone and unwanted. Society owes it to them to allow them to end their lives in dignity, and we should show them some compassion in their twilight years. That is the hallmark of a civilised society. The problem is a growing number of elderly people and the absence of any long-term strategy to cope with them.
Column 631
We still await the Government's reponse to the Griffiths report, which is wanted as quickly as possible and should be considered in conjunction with the Wagner report. There is a national discrepancy between the number of residential and National Health Service beds of about 25,000. For humane reasons alone, there is a case for keeping Fullerton open until the sums are correct. If Fullerton closes, that will have terrible consequences for a long-term policy has yet to be determined.Trent regional health authority has no long-term plans. According to a recent parliamentary answer, Trent is still holding consultations and reviewing its strategy. Examination of Doncaster's population shows that those aged between 75 and 85 numbered 12,785 in 1986. By 1996, that figure will grow to 14,290--an increase of 11.8 per cent. By 2006, that aged population will grow to 15,720--an increase of 23 per cent. In 1986, those aged 85 or more in Doncaster totalled 2,750. By 1996, that figure will grow to 3,161--an increase of 14.9 per cent. By 2006, the figure will be 5,070-- an 84.3 per cent. increase. Those figures are horrendous.
The local authority will not be able to assist because the average age of those in local authority care is 82. More than 80 per cent. of all residents in social service care are more than 75 years of age. Everyone knows that local authority part III accommodation is under stress. Because of the make-up of our population, social services are the second biggest spenders in the local authority. The local authority has suffered a one third reduction in rate support grant since the Government were elected in 1979, and one can see the effect that that has had.
The Dearne valley is a deprived area, and that is why the Government, with the co-operation of the local authority, are endeavouring to lift morale. However, with the proposed closure, the health authority will undermine the work both of the Government and of the local authority.
Because of high unemployment, many people leave the area to seek work. It is the young and active who leave, giving rise to an imbalance in the population and to a disproportionate number of the infirm and elderly to be looked after. The family unit is split up, because if the young go away to seek work, they cannot take with them their elderly or infirm parents. As a consequence, the local authority has to provide care services. Other family members who remain are faced with Government regulations that hit those wishing to meet their family responsibilities, because the care allowance is so small. Looking after their parents could financially affect their own families.
I turn to the Trent regional health authority report, a copy of which I presume the Minister has. The report of the health authority's sub- committee gives the background to the proposed relocation. The sub- committee took just five minutes to discuss that important subject, which is deplorable. Paragraph 1.2 of the report states :
"Fullerton Hospital currently provides a maximum of 34 beds." However, it is stated later :
"There are currently 25 beds in use at Fullerton Hospital." That represents a deliberate policy of run-down by the local authority in advance of the Minister's decision.
Paragraph 1.3.3 talks about paramedics, but not with this type of patient. I should like the Minister to look at some photographs I have here because they depict the type of patient. Paragraph 1.3 talks about Fullerton having to
Column 632
be served from Montagu hospital. Montagu hospital is already linked with Doncaster royal infirmary, so I do not see any difference between DRI-Montagu and Montagu-Fullerton.Paragraph 1.3.4 talks about savings of £100,000. I question whether that is a true figure. Certainly when one takes into consideration humanitarian aspects, money pales into insignificance. Paragraph 1.3.5 talks about appropriate medical care, but it is rubbish. Fullerton is better. Paragraph 1.4 talks about the relocation of services. Could we not have a ballot of staff, patients and the community on that?
I pay tribute to the staff and friends of Fullerton hospital. They have played a tremendous role in the past and have been instrumental in adding many years to patients' lives. Paragraph 3.2.2 talks about giving the name "Fullerton" to a ward at Montagu hospital. That is a load of rubbish. Paragraph 3.2.3 talks about upgrading, but, because of the financial problems of Doncaster, that will not take place. I do not think that the proposals in paragraph 3.2.4 will take place either.
Paragraph 3.2.5 talks about Conisbrough hospital being at risk. Unless we get cash to maintain services, we are on a downward spiral. Paragraph 3.2.6 will be affected by restrictions on finances. All I can say on paragraph 3.2.7 is that Doncaster council has its own financial problems. One must question whether paragraph 3.2.9 is correct. Money problems will affect paragraph 3.3. For those reasons we need to look again.
"The principles that adequate health care should be provided to all regardless of ability to pay must be the foundation of any arrangements for financing the Health Service."
Those are not my words, but those of the Prime Minister at the Conservative party conference in 1982 and repeated in the 1983 Conservative party manifesto.
I pay tribute to all those connected with Fullerton. They have done a tremendous job in the past and would do so in future. Will the Minister instruct the health authority to consult the patients and the staff at Fullerton, and the people of Doncaster? If he does, there will be an overwhelming majority, indeed a unanimous vote, to keep Fullerton open. I plead with the Minister on behalf of the elderly who have been served so well in the past and on behalf of my constituents to intervene and keep Fullerton open.
2.49 pm
| Next Section
| Home Page |