Section 25 provides that the board may pay to a member attending a meeting of the board, Committee or other committee of the board his travelling and subsistence expenses, and it sets out that the payment shall be in accordance with a scale approved by the Minister after consultation with the Minister for Finance. The suggestion I wish to make is that certain members of the board should be paid more than travelling and subsistence expenses. A number of professional people, doctors and so on, will be members of these boards, and my experience of similar bodies is that the attendance is very much more regular and better if the members receive a fee in addition to out-of-pocket expenses.
There is a very good precedent for the payment of a fee to members of a body such as this, in the case of the General Medical Council, the General Registration Council, the Dental Board and so on. I believe it would greatly improve the working of the board if the members, many of whom will be doctors in private practice, who, if they give up a day or an evening, are sacrificing their earnings—some may be employed by local bodies and they are in a rather different position from that of doctors engaged in private practice, who, if they are to do their duty conscientiously must sacrifice not merely their time and intelligence but their financial position—are paid a fee.
The third point relates to the latter portion of sub-section (2) of Section 45, dealing with the case of nurses charged with some offence before the board. It provides that in these proceedings "the defendant shall have the opportunity of answering the allegations made against the defendant". Section 46 (3) is similar, as applying to the case of midwives. I raised this point before and I had the Minister's assurance that it did permit the accused nurse or midwife to be represented by solicitor or counsel, and, if that is so, I cannot see any objection to the inclusion of such a clause in the Bill. As it reads, it does not suggest to the ordinary layman that anyone but the accused person has any right of audience at all. In many cases, these are people who have not received very good education. In most cases, they are fairly young and are under a very great strain in appearing on a grave charge before an impressive body such as a board or committee and are not in a position to do themselves justice. If their case could be presented by an experienced solicitor or counsel, it might be very different from what it will appear to be if the accused person has to try to defend herself. There is, again, ample precedent in the case of the other disciplinary bodies I have mentioned. I am throwing out these suggestions, not as amendments, but for the consideration of the Minister and I thank you, Sir, for having allowed me to say what I should have said a week ago. Finally, I wish to congratulate the Minister on what I believe to be the very real improvements he has made in an excellent measure.
