| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
To lie upon the Table.
Driving Instructors
7.49 pm
David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire) (Lab/Co-op):
I rise to present the petition of the Derby and District Driving Instructors Association, which overlaps my constituency. Approved driving instructors throughout the country are alarmed by the Driving Standards Agency's proposal to introduce multiple-choice questions and hazard perception tests for all currently registered approved driving instructors. They believe that to require an ADI to undertake a hazard perception test is at best ridiculous and at worst insulting, because if instructors were not on top of hazard perception skills, they would not survive the average working day. They say that the DSA has discussed continuous professional development over the past two years, and they believe that that is the preferable way forward rather than the threat to remove them from the register if they fail a computer game. They point out that removal from the register is always possible under the fit and proper clause.
21 Jul 2004 : Column 455
To the House of Commons, the petition of 60 driving instructors and others in and around North-West Leicestershire declares that we the undersigned formally protest at the decision of the Driving Standards Agency to impose on qualified driving instructors a requirement to pass a further theory exam—including a hazard perception test—and to threaten to remove the livelihoods of those not successful within three attempts. The Petitioners—
who are led by Pamela A. Davies of 18 Iveagh close, Measham—
therefore request that the House of Commons do reject the decision aforementioned of the DSA. And the petitioners remain etc.
To lie upon the Table.
Post Office Closure
7.51 pm
Mr. Parmjit Dhanda (Gloucester) (Lab): I rise to present a petition bearing the signatures of 3,520 Gloucester residents, compiled by me, the "Gloucester Citizen" newspaper, Councillor Andrew Gravels and a range of community groups.
To the House of Commons, the petition of residents of Gloucester declares that they oppose the plans by Morrisons to close the local post office in Abbeydale and that they are leading a campaign to keep the local post office open. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to ensure that supermarkets consult Post Office Ltd., Postwatch, hon. Members and local communities before closing local post offices. And the petitioners remain etc.
To lie upon the Table.
ME
7.52 pm
Mr. Anthony D. Wright (Great Yarmouth) (Lab): I rise to present the petition of Action for ME on behalf of the 240,000 people in the UK affected by ME.
Declares that the direct cost to the nation of lost revenue, benefits and healthcare spend for the 240,000 people with ME amounts to £3.5 billion per annum. The petitioners further declare that a minimum of 1 per cent. of that cost, being £35 million, is required to begin research into this disabling chronic illness for which there is no cure or effective treatment at present.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons pass legislation to provide for a cross-government response to the wide scale health problem of ME and for the implementation of a fully funded research programme. And the petitioners remain etc.
To lie upon the Table.
21 Jul 2004 : Column 456
Dr. Raj Mattu
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Heppell.]
7.53 pm
Mr. Jim Cunningham (Coventry, South) (Lab): I begin by thanking Mr. Speaker for granting the debate, and my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-West (Mr. Robinson) and I appreciate his allowing us once again to debate the matter. The debate is by no means meant to constitute an attack on the staff at Walsgrave hospital, who have done a wonderful job, especially since the change in leadership.
This debate is probably the fourth on Dr. Mattu's suspension, and it is the third case of an unresolved suspension at Walsgrave hospital. The current cost of those three suspensions amounts to £1.2 million, which could have been used to deliver better NHS services. It is therefore vital that we resolve the matter, especially given the growing economic cost to the public, which has caused much community protest, not to mention the loss of a competent doctor from Walsgrave hospital.
Dr. Mattu's suspension has lasted for more than two and a half years and, given that the time period for the panel to examine the case will extend to the end of January and possibly February, I think—my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-West probably agrees—the doctor should be reinstated without prejudice until the matter is sorted out.
We now find that the disciplinary panel chosen to deal with the case will not meet until the end of January 2005, a further six months away. Surely such a procedure cannot be deemed adequate. I believe that in such cases it benefits neither the doctor in question nor the hospital for action to be delayed for more than two and a half years—approaching three, in fact. This is having a lasting effect on the doctor and his family, and the cost to the NHS is growing.
There is something fundamentally wrong with a system that has no time for the resolution of cases such as Dr. Mattu's. What has happened to the implementation of the National Audit Office's report and recommendations? I am sure my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-West agrees that there should be an independent inquiry into the three cases that have occurred over the past three or four years, to find out exactly how the trust has handled them. There is a big question mark over the way in which it deals with such cases.
I stress that we are not prejudicing the outcome of the case, and only want to resolve the issue once and for all. We are asking for justice for Dr. Mattu. While we must question the competence and efficiency of a disciplinary process that has continued for perhaps more than three years and has yet to reach a conclusion, we believe that Dr. Mattu was suspended for whistleblowing. If there are other documented reasons—my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-West will probably mention this—the trust should make us aware of them, rather than allowing rumours to fly about all over Coventry. That is in the public interest, and will restore confidence in the competence of the trust's decision making.
We understand that the cost of Dr. Mattu's case is now probably more than £500,000, although it should be borne in mind that that goes back to about six
21 Jul 2004 : Column 457
months ago. There should be an independent inquiry into the way in which the case has been handled. It should be dealt with by an independently selected panel to ensure its validity, and to ensure that there is a timely resolution at the least possible cost to the public. As far as we are aware, Dr. Mattu was not suspended for medical reasons.
I believe that Dr. Mattu's human rights are being denied because of the time that his case has taken, and the inappropriate way in which the trust has been handling matters. The trust should bring to a conclusion any other allegations against Dr. Mattu, and state what they are and the reasons for his suspension. As I am sure my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-West will agree, the Minister should intervene directly. It is no good passing the matter on to the trust; the Minister has the powers, and should deal with it in a proper manner. He should set up a proper independent inquiry, and reinstate the doctor until such time as the panel does meet and decide whether he is guilty as charged.
As I am sure the Minister knows, there is public concern in Coventry and rumours—not very pleasant rumours—are flying about. I hope that he will take what I have said on board, and look into the matter. It seems to me that every time a consultant or other doctor is suspended at that hospital, all sorts of stories circulate and we eventually find that there was no basis for them. That is no way in which to conduct the business of a hospital and, in particular, a disciplinary procedure.
Mr. James Plaskitt (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab): I greatly admire the hard work done by my hon. Friends the Members for Coventry, South (Mr. Cunningham) and for Coventry, North-West (Mr. Robinson) on this case. I intervene because, during this lengthy inquiry, Dr. Mattu has become a constituent of mine. When I contacted my hon. Friend the Minister on behalf of my constituent, he confirmed that the matter had been unresolved for too long. Does that not add weight to my hon. Friend's point about the need for further ministerial intervention?
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |