Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

Lord Shaughnessy: My Lords, will the Minister advise us whether any survey was made of the opinions of those in the Armed Forces involved with the new measure before the decision was taken?

Earl Howe: My Lords, the service chiefs have been involved at all stages and consulted along the way. Service families have also been kept in regular touch with the Government's plans.

Lord Harris of Greenwich: My Lords, a moment ago the noble Earl said that the service chiefs had been consulted. Will he go a little further? Did they agree with Ministers and, in particular, the Secretary of State that this course of action was desirable?

Earl Howe: My Lords, the service chiefs have agreed that the policy represents the best way forward for

19 Jun 1996 : Column 316

service families, bearing in mind the problems that I have identified, most notably the need to upgrade service housing.

Lord Ironside: My Lords, in spite of my noble friend's remarks, the sale and leaseback arrangement is fraught with dangers of all kinds. I hope therefore that he will act cautiously and prudently. Will he give the House assurances that those quarters that are leased back are those best placed to suit service families? Will he also assure the House that the new owners will not be able to interfere in any way at all with the tenancies and rentals that are entered into by service families with the Ministry of Defence?

Earl Howe: My Lords, I give my noble friend a complete assurance on that point, particularly as regards rents. The rents that service families will pay will continue to be set by the independent Armed Forces Pay Review Body. Neither the Government nor the Ministry of Defence will have any say in that matter.

Baroness Strange: My Lords--

Noble Lords: Next Question! Order!

Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, something tells me that we shall be returning to this question. I am aware that the noble Baroness has a fourth Question. I am sure that the House would like to give her a clear run.

Doctors: Training Finance

3.1 p.m.

Baroness Fisher of Rednal asked Her Majesty's Government:

    How they intend to guarantee the necessary finance to train an additional 500 doctors by the year 2000 in view of the impact upon university medical schools brought about by the 28 per cent. cut in their funding over the past six years and the further 5 per cent. cut for teacher training imposed in the last budget.

The Minister of State, Department for Education and Employment (Lord Henley): My Lords, the allocation of funds to individual universities for the training of doctors is the responsibility of the higher education funding councils of England, Scotland and Wales, and the Department of Education for Northern Ireland. The funding bodies are taking into account the target increase of 500 additional medical undergraduate students, having consulted universities with medical schools about intakes. The universities will be more than half way to meeting the target in 1996-97. The further increase of about 230 would need to be phased in over the following three years.

Baroness Fisher of Rednal: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Is he aware that there is grave concern in the majority of universities catering for the training of doctors? They feel sure that they will not be able to fulfil those numbers by the year the noble Lord mentioned. Funding is inadequate. There is a fall in student numbers because of the reduction in the amount

19 Jun 1996 : Column 317

of money they can claim. Is it not diabolical that the Government are cutting back on the numbers of doctors to be trained to work in the National Health Service at the beginning of the next century?

Lord Henley: My Lords, I simply do not accept the noble Baroness's allegation that student numbers are falling. We have seen an increase in medical students of 11 per cent. from 4,470 to 4,970. That is well on course. As regards drop-out rates, the rates throughout the whole of higher education are relatively low. I have no evidence on drop-out levels for medical students. However, my advice from the CVCP and the Higher Education Funding Council for England is that they are probably lower than average.

As regards the concerns highlighted by the noble Baroness, being the Minister for Education in this House I am more than well aware of the concerns put forward by the CVCP and the higher education fraternity. We are listening very carefully to their concerns. We have set up a couple of working groups with them, and we will take into account all those concerns in the current spending round. However, the Government have to take into account the wider considerations, such as the burden on the taxpayer and the need to control public expenditure.

Baroness Gardner of Parkes: My Lords, does the Minister agree that the Calman Report includes a recommendation for a tremendous amount of additional training for medical staff? Although that will have financial implications, the Government are well set on the route of bringing in all that additional medical training.

Lord Henley: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for highlighting that point. We have seen quite a dramatic growth in the number of doctors working in the NHS over the past few years, from something of the order of 67,110 in 1979 to 82,680 in 1994.

Lord Winston: My Lords, is the Minister aware that, in spite of what the noble Baroness, Lady Gardner of Parkes, maintains, there is very serious worry throughout the medical profession, upheld by the various presidents of the Royal Colleges, concerning the level of medical staffing--particularly if the Calman recommendations are to be implemented? It has been calculated that we shall need a 30 per cent. expansion at consultant level if we are to train and also treat patients at the same time.

Lord Henley: My Lords, I am grateful that the alleged shortage of medical staff is not so severe as to keep the noble Lord away from this House today, yesterday and on other days.

Noble Lords: Oh!

Lord Henley: Obviously, my Lords, I am aware of those concerns. But we have increased the numbers of trained doctors quite dramatically and are further increasing the number of medical students. We are well on target to meet the increase of 500 by the year 2000.

19 Jun 1996 : Column 318

Lord Winston: My Lords, for the Minister's information, I am a university employee. Is he aware that, were it not for the fact that universities maintain so many people like myself, the National Health Service would collapse?

Lord Henley: My Lords, I hope that the noble Lord will take a bit of gentle teasing in good part. If he does not, I shall be more than happy to withdraw my remark. I am also grateful that he pointed out the contribution that universities make to the health service. That is why we fund the whole of higher education to the extent that we do. Some £7 billion of taxpayers' money goes towards higher education. That is a very considerable sum indeed.

Lord Morris of Castle Morris: My Lords, I am sure that we on these Benches accept that what the Minister said was in the spirit of gentle repartee, although at the time it did not quite seem like that. Does the Minister accept that those of us who have spent many decades in university work are aware that clinical academic staff in universities spend over half their time treating patients and are also engaged in research? Has he read the letter to Sir Michael Thompson, chairman of the CVCP Medical Committee, from his honourable friend, Mr. Eric Forth, dated 5th June in which he says that,

    "the higher education budget funds the cost of teaching medical undergraduate students ... In this sense there is not a direct link between the two. I understand that, to date, the Department of Health has not received any evidence from the NHS that patient care has been affected by recent unit cost cuts in higher education funding"?
Has the Minister ever heard anything more callous and unfeeling?

Lord Henley: My Lords, I totally reject the suggestion that the letter from my honourable friend was either callous or unfeeling. The noble Lord comes to this House with a great deal of experience of the higher education sector; others in the House have similar experience. Many put forward demands of a reasonable or less reasonable sort for yet further funding. As I made clear, in very difficult times we provide something of the order of £7 billion of taxpayers' money for higher education. That has to be considered in the context of £35 billion overall spending on public education in this country. Those are very considerable sums. Very difficult decisions have to be made about allocating them. We believe that the medical side of higher education receives its fair share.

Hong Kong (War Wives and Widows) (No. 2) Bill [H.L.]

3.9 p.m.

Lord Willoughby de Broke: My Lords, I understand that no amendments have been set down to this Bill and that no noble Lord has indicated a wish to move a manuscript amendment or to speak in Committee. Therefore, unless any noble Lord objects, I beg to move that the order of commitment be discharged.

Moved, That the order of commitment be discharged.--(Lord Willoughby de Broke.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

19 Jun 1996 : Column 319

Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page