Tag: Patient’s Charter

  • PMQT – 20 February 1997

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 20th February 1997.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. O’Hara: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 February.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major): This morning, I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

    Mr. O’Hara: Is the Prime Minister aware that, despite all the Government’s attempts to massage and manipulate the figures, national health service waiting lists are again at record levels? There is a waiting list of 179,000 in my area of the north-west alone. Could it just be that the Government’s policy of replacing 50,000 nurses with 20,000 managers and doubling the price of bureaucracy has something to do with this crisis?

    The Prime Minister: I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman is mistaken.

    Mr. Mackinlay: No, he is not.

    The Prime Minister: Yes he is, and I will explain precisely why.

    Waiting lists are broadly the same as last year. They have fallen very dramatically during the present Parliament. If the hon. Member for Knowsley, South (Mr. O’Hara) would care to look at the figures for the period before the health reforms and the patient’s charter, he will see that more than 200,000 people had waited for more than a year, of whom 80,000 had waited for more than two years. At the end of December, only 2 per cent. of patients-22,000-had been waiting for more than a year, and the number who had waited for more than 18 months was down to 123.

    The fact is that more people are being treated, they are being treated more swiftly, and they are being treated better.

     

    Q2. Mr. John Marshall: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 February.

    The Prime Minister: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Marshall: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that last month the Treasury repaid £6,000 million of debt? Will he also confirm that, if anyone sought to spend an extra £30,000 million of public money, they could do so only by increasing taxes, increasing borrowing and increasing interest rates, all of which would put an end to the economic recovery that is the envy of the whole of the rest of western Europe?

    The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend is correct on both counts. Certainly, if anything remotely approximating to £30,000 million were spent in the next Parliament in addition to current spending plans, taxes and interest rates would rise, and I have no doubt that it would have very severe effects on the economy as a whole. As for debt, I was delighted to see that £6 billion had been repaid in the past month-

    Mr. Skinner: Who put it up?

    The Prime Minister: I will just remind the hon. Gentleman that we have a lower debt ratio than any other major economy in Europe. I will remind him that, in every single year since we came to power, the debt ratio has been lower than in any single year in which he supported a Labour Government.

    Mr. Blair: Does the Prime Minister agree with his Chancellor that although, of course, the Government are hostile to a single currency on a non-convergent basis, the Government-I quote the Chancellor-

    “doesn’t have a hostile attitude to the single currency . . . The position remains that we have an open option.”

    Those words were repeated by the Deputy Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister repeat those words and say that he agrees specifically with his Chancellor and his Deputy Prime Minister?

    The Prime Minister: Of course, if there were not arguments in both directions, we would not have kept our options open. Of course I agree with my right hon. and learned Friend.

    Mr. Blair: The Prime Minister has said in very clear terms that he agrees with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Will he disown Conservative central office, which has been briefing that, in effect, he has closed the option of joining a single currency?

    The Prime Minister: No one has been briefing to that effect. The Cabinet set out its position some time ago. It has been reaffirmed on a number of occasions. I reaffirm it again today. It was set out perfectly clearly. The right hon. Gentleman can forget the minor textual exegesis and stick with the facts: that the policy was set out perfectly clearly and that that remains the policy. I hope that the leader of the Labour party might now care to examine the different statements of members of his shadow Cabinet over recent weeks.

     

    Q3. Dr. Goodson-Wickes: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 February.

    The Prime Minister: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave some moments ago.

    Dr. Goodson-Wickes: Will my right hon. Friend join me in paying tribute to the superb and often inadequately recognised work carried out by the Prince of Wales’s group of charities? Quite apart from offering practical help to more than 150,000 young people, it has established more than 60,000 jobs. Will my right hon. Friend endorse the project that I visited in my constituency this week, where the Prince’s Trust rehabilitated a park? By such projects young people take practical steps to serve their local community, while at the same time establishing self-reliance.

    The Prime Minister: I am happy to do that. Voluntary service plays a very important part in the fabric of life in this country, and I know of no nation in the world in which the sum total of voluntary service matches that of the United Kingdom. The work done by the Prince’s Trust and other voluntary bodies is absolutely magnificent, and the Government will continue to give their support to it.

    Mr. Ashdown: Let us see. Last week, the Health Secretary told us that the Conservatives would abolish a Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Secretary said, oh no, they would not. Yesterday, the Foreign Secretary said that the Government were hostile to a single currency and the Chancellor said, oh no, they were not. Has it yet occurred to the Prime Minister what is so plain and evident to everybody else-that his divided Cabinet has given up fighting for the interests of the country and has started instead to fight for his job after the election?

    The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman’s commitment openly and certainly honestly-I concede that-to put up the rate of income tax will certainly help to keep me here on this Bench after the election.

    Mr. Duncan Smith: Does not my right hon. Friend have sympathy for the victims of the failed cultural revolution? In Islington, for example, it is estimated that up to 50 per cent. of children are educated outside the borough. What does he have to say to those poor parents who are now driven to flee from a Labour administration and become educational refugees across the face of London?

    The Prime Minister: I think that it was the leader of the Labour party who said, “You can’t tell what a Government is like until it is in power.” In Islington, Labour is in power, and my hon. Friend points out vividly what it is like. If parents are fleeing Islington, as we understand they are, it certainly is a new version of the term “school run”.

     

    Sanctions (Libya)

    Q4. Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will discuss with President Clinton the consequences for (a) the imposition of sanctions on Libya and (b) the case against Libyan nationals of the dismissal of James Thurman from the service of the United States Government.

    The Prime Minister: I have no plans to do so. The case against the two accused Libyans does not depend on any evidence that Mr. Thurman might give.

    Mr. Dalyell: Has Thurman been reassigned to other duties for fabricating forensic evidence?

    The Prime Minister: I am certainly not aware that that is the case. If the hon. Gentleman has any information that it is, or any information that he thinks bears on this matter-

    Mr. Dalyell: It is in the New York Times.

    The Prime Minister: If the hon. Gentleman will forgive me, I am not an avid and daily reader of the New York Times. If he has any information that is pertinent to this case, and would care to provide me with it, I will certainly undertake to have it carefully examined.

    Sir Teddy Taylor: As senior Scottish advocates have said that it would be impossible for the two accused to have a fair trial in Scotland because of press publicity, and as the Libyan Government have now stated that they will hand over the two accused to the Arab League for committal to trial in The Hague or anywhere else, would it not help those who lost their relatives and friends at Lockerbie to have the issue resolved? My right hon. Friend is, as we all know, basically a straight, decent person, so will he endeavour to solve the problem and stop simply engaging in the throwing of insults? Could we not solve it in the interests of those who lost their relatives and friends at Lockerbie?

    The Prime Minister: I certainly want a solution to this problem. We would like a solution as much as the relatives, but we need a proper criminal trial and there are genuine and practical difficulties in trying to establish such a trial in a third country. I think that many hon. Members, including-if my hon. Friend will permit me to say so-me, would, on grounds of principle, find a trial in a third country very difficult to accept. [Hon. Members: “Why?”] I shall tell hon. Members why. It could suggest that a trial in Scotland or the United States would not be fair.

    I am not prepared to accept that premise in terms of a trial in Scotland. Nor do I think that it would be remotely attractive for us to allow alleged terrorists to dictate where they may or may not be tried. That would be a bad principle. The Security Council resolutions say that they should be tried in Scotland or the United States-two countries with a particular interest in the matter.

    I have to add that I am very doubtful that the Libyans would deliver the accused for such a trial, even if one were to be set up, but, for the reasons that I have set out, the trial should be either in Scotland, which would be the preference, or in the United States.

     

    Engagements

    Q5. Mr. McKelvey: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 February.

    The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. McKelvey: Does the Prime Minister share my genuine concern about the outrageous activities of the directors of Camelot in attempting to take gambling on the lottery into every home in the land and extend their links with rather devious gambling projects abroad? Would it not be possible for him to stop this development? Otherwise, he will leave a legacy of children who were brought up in the midst of gambling mania.

    The Prime Minister: As the hon. Gentleman knows, the lottery is very tightly regulated and there will be no changes to the structure or content of the constituent games without the specific involvement of the director general. The Government have no intention of allowing the good name of the lottery to be jeopardised. I think that the hon. Gentleman would share my pleasure at the sheer scale of the resources produced by the lottery for good causes. Today, for example, the heritage lottery fund is awarding £140 million to 24 of the nation’s best loved museums.

    Mr. Stephen: Does my right hon. Friend agree that efficient professional administration is vital to the success of the national health service? Does he recall that, when we decided to modernise the system by getting rid of the whole regional tier of NHS bureaucracy, the Labour party was against it? What does he therefore think of its promises to save money on NHS bureaucracy?

    The Prime Minister: I agree with my hon. Friend that there were substantial savings to be made by the abolition of the regional health authority tier, and that those savings were opposed by the Labour party. The health service is one of the most efficient health services in the world and, in terms of management expenditure, it is now 25 per cent. more efficient than in 1979.

     

    Electoral Registration

    Q6. Mr. Barnes: To ask the Prime Minister if he will introduce proposals to encourage registration on supplementary lists of those missing from electoral registers before the announcement of the date of the general election.

    The Prime Minister: I see no need to do so. The vast majority of eligible electors are registered and a well-established claims procedure exists for those who are not.

    Mr. Barnes: Why will the Government not publish the number of people who are currently on electoral registers? What have they got to hide? Are the figures as bad as they were last year, when at least 2 million people were missing from the registers? Why cannot we have a massive campaign to put people on supplementary lists, which could be added to lists of those who are eligible to vote at the general election? The Halifax building society organised a massive campaign for what it called its “big vote”. The general election is the biggest vote of all, and all our people should be entitled to exercise their vote.

    The Prime Minister: I, of course, agree with that. The Conservative party has done all it can to ensure that people are registered to vote at the general election. As for the figures for which the hon. Gentleman asked, the 1996 electoral registers for the United Kingdom contained just under 44 million names-the highest number ever. New registers came into force on 16 February, and the figures for them should be available by the end of March.

  • PMQT – 25 June 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 25th June 1992.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Betts : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 June.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

    Mr. Betts : Is the Prime Minister aware of reports that dentists in Huntingdon are to refuse to treat any new patients, including children, under the national health service because of Government cuts in funding? How will the Prime Minister explain to his constituents that, despite repeated excuses, the Government are failing to give the NHS the level of resources necessary to enable it to provide a first-class level of treatment for all?

    The Prime Minister : There is no question of anyone needing to go without a national health service dentist in Huntingdon. Dentists in Cambridgeshire have more patients than the national average because of population growth. A recruitment campaign for dentists has been planned for some time and will go ahead in September. If necessary, the local family health services authority will seek agreement from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health to employ salaried dentists. Four dentists are already interested in such appointments. If people have any trouble finding dentists, they should go to their family health services authority, which should be able to help.

    Mr. Dykes : May I wish my right hon. Friend well in the United Kingdom presidency of the European Community? Will he ensure that Ministers work hard in the coming months to explain the immense benefits of the Maastricht treaty to the interests of this country– [Interruption.] which will become clearer over time? If that work is successful, it will help to diminish some of the grotesque xenophobia and hysteria of recent weeks.

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to my hon. Friend. As he knows, the Maastricht agreement was made within the negotiating terms agree by the House, was subsequently endorsed by the House and was agreed at a general election. The Second Reading of the Bill has been approved, it remains Government policy and in due course we shall carry it through.

    Mr. Hattersley : Will the Prime Minister confirm that the Government now support the extension of Mr. Delors’ term of office as president of the European Commission ?

    The Prime Minister : It is a matter that will be discussed at the weekend. There is, as I understand it, likely to be only one candidate. If that is Mr. Delors, we shall support him.

    Mr. Hattersley : Since I take it that that answer is as far as the Prime Minister’s reserves of courage are liable to go towards the answer yes, will he give Mr. Delors the Opposition’s congratulations– [Interruption] and tell Mr. Delors that we confidently expect him to continue to implement policies which are necessary for this country, are supported by the Labour party and are anathema to Tory Back Benchers?

    The Prime Minister : I am not entirely sure that the right hon. Gentleman carried all his Friend’s with him.

    Sir Fergus Montgomery : Has my right hon. Friend seen the recent survey that showed that 91 per cent. of British exporters reported either good or very good orders for the first three months of this year ? Does he agree that the efforts made by British exporters will lead the way to recovery?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend. Last month’s export figures were extremely good. They were up 6 per cent. by value and 4 per cent. by volume. I think that that shows the extent to which our competitiveness has increasingly enabled us to penetrate export markets which were previously not open to us.

     

    Q2. Mr. Bill Michie : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 June.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Michie : When will the Prime Minister stop going on about his wonderful citizen’s charter which, so far as I can see, has had only one effect until now, which is that British Rail passengers can keep their tickets ? At a much more serious level, pregnant women cannot keep their jobs. What good is a charter which does not allow women to be pregnant without being punished for it ?

    The Prime Minister : If the hon. Gentleman cared to read the whole range of citizen’s charters that we have produced, he would realise that it is a far wider-ranging initiative than he has begun to understand. It puts the consumer and not the producer first, and it will remain right at the heart of Government policy throughout the rest of this decade.

     

    Q3. Mrs. Gorman : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 June.

    The Prime Minister : I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

    Mrs. Gorman : May I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the remarks that he made on Tuesday, when he said that there would be another debate in the House on the Maastricht Bill before Third Reading? May I recommend the attitude of one of his predecessors, my right hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Sir E. Heath), who allowed a free vote of the House in similar circumstances when he was piloting the European Communities legislation through the House? Does my right hon. Friend not agree that that would be an excellent way to test the water before we come to voting on the Maastricht Bill?

    The Prime Minister : I was not a Member of the House at that moment, and I am not entirely sure that I recall that free vote. The House has now debated and voted on the Maastricht agreement on three occasions. As I indicated a moment ago to my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow, East (Mr. Dykes), we contested the general election on that proposition–a general election at which all my hon. Friends were returned on a manifesto to which they all subscribed. The Maastricht treaty was negotiated in good faith by all member states. I have no intention of breaking the word of the British Government that was given on that occasion ; nor do I have any intention of compromising what we agreed on that occasion and wrecking this country’s reputation for plain and honest dealing and good faith. In due course, therefore, I shall be inviting my right hon. and hon. Friends to support the Government and the Bill.

    Dr. Wright : The Government have devoted many millions of pounds and many millions of copies to telling people about the glories of the parent’s charter and the patient’s charter. Will the Prime Minister tell the House how many millions of pounds and how many millions of copies have been devoted to telling the British people about the Maastricht treaty?

    The Prime Minister : From memory, I think that the House spent 30 hours debating it before we even went to Maastricht. I do not think that there is any doubt about the realities of what the treaty stands for in the minds of the British people. They knew that at the election, and they supported it at the election.

     

    Q4. Mr. Milligan : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 June.

    The Prime Minister : I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Milligan : Will my right hon. Friend congratulate the Secretary of State for Employment on her triumph in Luxembourg yesterday? It is good news for pay packets, good news for jobs and good news for investment. Will my right hon. Friend also confirm that it shows that the best way to fight for British interests is to negotiate strongly, but with a reputation as a country which keeps the agreements that we make and ratifies the treaties that we sign?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to my hon. Friend and I wholeheartedly agree with him. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment achieved an outcome at yesterday’s Economic and Social Council which meets every one of the United Kingdom’s most crucial objectives. She has preserved the flexibility which employers and employees in the United Kingdom enjoy and which is one of our greatest assets. I must tell the House, however, that the directive is still not–and may not be– agreed in the European Community. In any event, it is still our case, irrespective of the negotiating triumph by my right hon. Friend yesterday, that the treaty base under which it has been brought forward is wrong and that if it is passed we may still challenge it in the European Court.

     

    Homelessness

    Q5. Mr. Corbyn : To ask the Prime Minister when he next plans to meet representatives of London’s homeless.

    The Prime Minister : I have no plans to do so at present, but my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment regularly meets representatives of the voluntary organisations in London who work with homeless people.

    Mr. Corbyn : Does the Prime Minister realise that the 25 million sq ft of empty offices in London and still more under construction are an insult to the 2,000 people who sleep on the streets of the capital city every night and to the 18,000 people living in hostels? When will the Government direct the construction industry to build houses for rent for those who need them, rather than speculative office blocks to lie idle for the benefit of property speculators? This is a crucial matter and the right hon. Gentleman stands condemned by those who are forced to sleep on the streets at night.

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman, standing in a glass house, should be careful where he throws his bricks. Of the top 10 authorities with empty properties, six are Labour controlled and none is Conservative controlled. If the hon. Gentleman were really concerned, he would be putting pressure on Manchester, Salford, Birmingham, Hackney, Knowsley and Newcastle upon Tyne. He might then get homeless people back into accommodation.

    Several Hon. Members rose —

    Madam Speaker : Order. I remind the House that this is a closed question.

    Mr. John Marshall : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that homelessness in London is the result of decades of rent control, which Conservative rule got rid of, and of incompetence by high-spending Labour councils?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend. There is scope for the private rented sector to grow and to provide low-cost flexible accommodation. The hostility of the Labour party over the years has cramped that growth and prevented that property becoming available for people who needed it. We have consistently sought to expand the privately rented sector, most recently with our proposed tax exemptions to help people who want to rent a room to do so. I hope that Opposition Members will support that policy.

     

    Engagements

    Q6. Mr. Beggs : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 June.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Beggs : May I invite the Prime Minister to make time in his busy schedule to visit my constituency to see for himself why Larne is the second busiest ferry port in the United Kingdom and to hear from the people there why he should use his influence to persuade the European Commission that Larne, Belfast, Stranraer and Dumfries be recognised as Euro-routes to and from Northern Ireland?

    The Prime Minister : I should be happy to take up that invitation from the hon. Gentleman. Northern Ireland is well served by its ports and I am confident that they will continue to provide the routes for most of the Province’s business and tourist traffic to Great Britain and onwards to Europe. They have performed magnificently in the past and I believe that they will continue to do so, and to grow, in the future.

    Mr. Mans : Does my right hon. Friend agree that what matters most to people is the amount that the Government take in tax from their wage packets? Bearing that in mind, may I ask him to confirm that he has no plans to follow the tax policies advocated by the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith) which, even in the view of many Labour Members, contributed greatly to the Opposition’s defeat?

    The Prime Minister : I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. Our policies of low taxation and low inflation were clearly what the electorate wanted at the last general election. I am aware of the dispute about why the Opposition lost the election, and I am sorry to note that for the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith) the honeymoon is over before the marriage has begun.

     

    Q7. Mr. Welsh : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 June.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Welsh : Is the Prime Minister aware of the National Children’s Home report issued this week, which shows that each day in Scotland 41,000 families on income support cannot afford to buy food, that 500 families are now housed in bed-and-breakfast accommodation, and that the city of Glasgow has the highest infant mortality rate in Europe? If the Prime Minister really believes in the family, does he share my disgust at that situation and my desire for urgent action?

    The Prime Minister : The definition used by the National Children’s Home for “poverty” was misleading, as the hon. Gentleman will know. He will also know that this year’s uprating of income support was substantially higher than the retail prices index. The definition used by the National Children’s Home defines someone as poor if he or she spends less than half the national average spending per head. The hon. Gentleman will realise that that measure of poverty excludes a Greek spending the average in Greece, while a richer person in the United Kingdom spending less than half the national average is classed as poor. That definition does not stand up to examination.

    Mr. Rupert Allason : Will my right hon. Friend encourage the Foreign Secretary and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to declassify as much material as possible dating from before the second world war before it is all released in Moscow and Washington?

    The Prime Minister : I am sure that my right hon. Friends will have heard my hon. Friend’s advice.

  • Mr Major’s Speech to the Nursing Standard / BUPA Nursing Awards – 17 September 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech to the Nursing Standard/BUPA Nursing Awards dinner, held at the Marriott Hotel in London on 17th September 1991.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    Madam President, I am delighted to be with you this evening. These awards are very important. Important because they are the result of joint enterprise between the RCN, BUPA and Nursing Standard. There is scope for much more joint enterprise in many areas of health policy. And I hope and expect to see more.

    But important also because they recognise the service ethos which is at the heart of health care. I know already that the award winners all have one thing in common. They are all nurses, midwives or health visitors who are engaged in clinical practice. They have all been nominated for their work in improving the quality of care which they deliver to their patients.

    The delivery of care to patients is at the heart of nursing practice: and nursing practice is at the heart of our Health Service. The NHS is the largest employer in the country. And within it, nurses, midwives and health visitors form the largest professional group. So this is a good occasion for me to set out some objectives for the Service.

    In our country, the National Health Service is almost universally respected. The NHS offers peace of mind to millions of people. I am determined that it will thrive and grow as a truly National Service available to all our citizens. That is what it has done for the past twelve years.

    The facts speak for themselves. More patients have been treated. New treatments have been developed. More staff have been available. Since 1979 expenditure on the NHS has grown at 3 per cent a year over and above inflation: a cumulative increase of 50 per cent in real resources devoted to health care.

    But money is not everything. It is how we use that money that is so important. None of that progress in patient care could have been achieved without the commitment of the skilled professionals who work in the health service. Each and every day there are hundreds of thousands of cases of professional, dedicated, and successful health care.

    Of course, things go wrong from time to time. But everyone here, all of us, are committed to preventing and to solving those problems. The more we work together the more successful we will be. The purpose of tonight’s awards is to recognise individual effort to provide better care. Such effort epitomises all that is best in the National Health Service.

    I have good reason to be personally committed to the NHS. When I was seriously injured it was the NHS that treated me. When my parents were in their final illness, it was the NHS that cared for them. When my children were born it was the NHS that delivered them. In this I share the experience of millions.

    This government is quite clear about its health policy and the future of the NHS. That policy is founded on ten important principles.

    First, the needs of the patient must be paramount in running the NHS.

    Second, health care is free at the point of use in hospitals and in doctors’ surgeries. And it will remain so.

    Third, we will continue to offer free prescription charges, so that only those who can afford to do so will make a contribution to the cost of medicines.

    Fourth, the Government’s priority will be to see the NHS is not just maintained, but improved. Extra resources will continue to be provided for the NHS year after year within the limits the economy can afford.

    Fifth, all money – and I do mean all the money – that is saved by increased efficiency in hospitals will be ploughed back into patient care and not handed back to the Treasury.

    Sixth, the reforms we have introduced in the Health Service will continue to be directed towards improving care for patients, and ensuring that more responsibility for health care is handed down to local levels. That is why we created NHS Trusts and GP Fundholders. To give more responsibility to hospitals and GPs in deciding how best to meet local needs. And let me stress a fundamental truth about NHS Trusts. They are, and will remain an integral part of the National Health Service available to all. None will be privatised now or in the future.

    Seventh, as we have underlined in our Citizen’s Charter, every patient must be treated with proper respect and dignity at all times. And they must receive proper information about all aspects of their illness, treatments and care.

    Eighth, not only must the treatment offered by the NHS be clinically good. The NHS must offer patients certainty about the maximum time they may have to wait for inpatient or out-patient treatment.

    Ninth, families have the right to make private provision if they choose. Doctors and nurses have the right to practise privately. No free society should try to deny either right. As the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe begin to hope and plan for private health care, it is inconceivable that anyone in the UK should still oppose it. And, as it grows, there should be more constructive co-operation between the private and public sectors in health.

    Finally – and I place particular importance on this – nurses, doctors and all the staff who work so hard and with such skill deserve our support. I can assure you that they can count on mine and the wholehearted backing of this Government in the years ahead.

    Those ten principles will guide the way ahead for our policies on health. There will be many challenges. There may be setbacks. Meeting the ever-growing demand for health care is a daunting task, not only for Britain, but for every other country as well.

    But let us be clear why we face such challenges. They are the challenges of success. They came about because:

    – More people live longer.

    – Technical advance makes new treatments possible.

    – New techniques have been developed by professionals in health care.

    – New discoveries have been made by scientists involved in pharmaceutical and diagnostic research.

    Of course, it is reasonable to point to the case for growing resources. That is a legitimate matter for debate, though I regret it is all too often turned into a political football. But the growing pressure for more resources comes not because health care is failing, but because it is advancing – at a greater pace than ever before. And is advancing because of the success of the Service.

    In Britain we now spend over 30 billion pounds a year on the health service. More than on Defence. More than on Education. And as a Government we have a duty to ensure that taxpayers’ money is spent effectively. That is true for all public services. But what really matters for NHS spending is getting the best service from the resources available – for the patients and for the community as a whole. And that is what our reforms in the NHS are intended to bring about.

    I know that carrying through these changes has meant some heart-searching, much hard work, and has needed lasting commitment from all those involved. But the benefits are increasingly to be seen. With the principal reforms now in place we can lift our sights to the common goal of all these changes – a better Health Service.

    For I am quite clear where the NHS reforms are taking us.

    – We will see further improvements in the health of the nation – some of them quite dramatic, like the vastly improved prospects for children with leukaemia and reduction in measles, mumps and rubella. In 1990 there was not one death from acute measles – the first year without a death since records began.

    – We will see costs brought down and waste reduced within the NHS. And waste reduced means funds gained for the Service. I say again that every penny saved will stay in the NHS to provide more and better care.

    – We will see people working in the NHS with more confidence in the services they are delivering.

    – And we will see the public at large placing even more value on the NHS. Not just out of affectionate habit, but because it is getting better and better and is responding more directly to their needs.

    Madam President, in July, I launched our Citizen’s Charter. want that Charter and its principles to be a driving force in every part of the public service in the 1990s. The Citizen’s Charter’s key theme is to make public services more responsive to the needs and the wishes of their users and to raise further overall quality. Nowhere are these objectives more important than in health.

    The NHS reforms are already taking us a good way towards achieving the improvements set out in the Citizen’s Charter. In future those responsible for spending public money will be able to set new and demanding standards for those providing services to patients.

    We will be building on the reforms when we publish the Patient’s Charter soon. The Charter will set out in detail what people can expect of the NHS. It will also spell out what Health Authorities and providers are expected to do to ensure that these expectations are met. And what people can do to secure redress if they are not met.

    For example:

    – you can expect your District Health Authority to publish details of all the services it provides, together with an indication of the standards of quality it expects to maintain;

    – as soon as you are put on a waiting list, the hospital will write to let you know how their guaranteed waiting times affect you;

    – you can expect a named nurse or midwife to be responsible for your care from start to finish;

    – if things go wrong, the Patient’s Charter will tell you how to register a complaint about GP or hospital treatment.

    I am delighted to find from your manifesto for health that the Royal College of Nursing is thinking on very similar lines.

    You have argued for:

    – the right for all citizens to have access to good quality services;

    – the need for services to be matched more clearly to need;

    – the need to empower consumers, for example by providing information on the range of services available locally in language people can understand;

    – the need to inform patients about their diagnosis and to secure their consent to treatment and participation in research programmes;

    – the need for patients to be informed of the likely waiting time for treatment and given a guarantee that their wait will not exceed a stated maximum.

    It gives me great confidence to know that the driving force for delivery of service in the NHS does not need persuasion of the merits of the Charter approach. It is already your approach. This makes it much more likely that things will happen.

    It is, at last, becoming properly recognised that nursing as a profession is a key complement to medicine. Highly trained nurses are now the deliverers of care to cancer patients, to diabetics and to many others. In a number of areas nurses are running their own clinics. Nursing is becoming more specialised as nurses develop and extend their roles in both physical and psychological care. All these changes must make for the more effective use both of their skills – and those of doctors. Most important of all, it benefits patients and improves the choice available to them. I thoroughly welcome such developments and look forward to seeing them grow.

    Previous winners of these awards have provided us with examples of how nurses have pushed further their traditional role. They were innovators who had developed, for example:

    – new skills in counselling and support;

    – a programme of higher quality care for elderly patients with mental illness problems;

    – new arrangements for parent support and communications; and

    – a highly effective nurse-led service for those suffering from leg ulcers.

    Just a few examples of nurses carving out a new, improved and distinct role for themselves and raising the quality of care which patients receive. I know that when we hear the achievements of tonight’s winners there will be more excellent examples.

    For its part, the Government has reaffirmed its commitment to the development of nursing practice. William Waldegrave announced at the RCN Congress in May that he was making £3.2m available over the next five years for the development of Nursing Development Units and the concept of patient centred nursing care. I know that Ann Poole here is working closely with the Kings Fund, the NHS and professional organisations to develop this initiative.

    Madam President, Christine Hancock was kind enough to attend my seminar at Chequers where we discussed the then proposed health strategy. As all of you will know, we published the consultative document “The Health of the Nation” in June.

    That document was widely welcomed. The strategy seeks to strike a much better balance between prevention, treatment and rehabilitation. By setting national and local targets, I am confident the strategy will help tackle some of the main health problems of our time, for example reducing the amount of heart disease and cancers.

    But if the strategy is to succeed we need your help. The initiative is directed towards improving health in the widest sense. Not just through better diagnosis and treatments in doctors surgeries and in hospitals, but through preventive measures and more effective rehabilitation. Nurses, midwives and health visitors are also uniquely well-placed to get these messages across. That is why you must be involved in the planning of the strategy. The Department of Health is consulting widely on this initiative until the end of October. I hope that each of you will make your views known.

    So far, I have spoken mainly of the National Health Service of which we are all rightly proud. However, we must not overlook the important contribution which the independent health care sector makes in giving people a choice about how their health care needs are met. Moreover, in recent years we have seen many examples of co-operation and collaboration between the sectors, including some in the field of nurse education. These initiatives flourish through joint commitment. I am delighted with your achievements to date and urge you to continue your efforts.

    I believe that there is much more scope for collaborative ventures between the private health sector and the NHS. Although it is not a new development, the reforms will make this easier. For example, for some time the private sector has been an important supplier of elderly care to the NHS. Such developments provide choice to those buying services, and help to sustain standards. They ensure that we get the best possible value for every pound of taxpayers money spent on health care.

    Madam President, this evening we must thank BUPA and the Nursing Standard for sponsoring and organising these nursing awards. The Nursing Standard is not only run by nurses, it is owned by them through the Royal College.

    I understand that the College is celebrating its 75th anniversary this year. I congratulate you, your predecessors, and officers and members of the College, on the many successes which the organisation has had through the past 75 years. You have an enviable reputation as a College and I have no doubt that will grow further in the future.

    This evening I have touched on a wide range of nursing issues in my remarks. But the main theme has been that nurses, midwives and health visitors are at the very heart of health care. They have more direct contact with patients and with their families than any other health profession. Their responsibility for the well-being of the patient and family is critical. Their role in health care is quite unique. No one forgets the nurse who looked after them in hospital; the midwife who delivered their first child; the health visitor who checked mother and child thereafter. I would like to say thank you to all who work so hard and with such skill in the NHS and private sector. I wish you well for the future.