There is one matter not mentioned in this debate to which I should like to refer. I have been receiving a good many letters from members of the public who complain that they have been frustrated and exasperated in their dealings with health authorities because they were unable to find out who was the correct individual in the health authority office who could help them. What happens in some cases apparently is that a person needs a service, believes he is entitled to it under the Health Acts and wishes either to verify his entitlement or to be told exactly what he must do to obtain the service, or both. He telephones or calls to the authority and finds that it is very difficult to establish contact with the right person— the person who knows the problem and what should be done about it, and who will tell the inquirer clearly and sympathetically what he should do. Again, some of my correspondents suggest that medical officers and pharmacists, officers of the health authority, have not met their requirements in medical care or medicines and drugs.
Now, I do not want the House or health authorities and their officers to get the idea that I believe that all of the public who phone them or make inquiries are dealt with summarily or brusquely or that they are deliberately fobbed off. But I do feel that there is scope for better communications, a better way of handling people when they make their approach to the health authority. We would like to feel that officers of the authority realise fully that the inquirer is either somebody in need of service, or seeking one for one of his family or a neighbour in need, that he or she is very probably legally entitled to it, and that the health authority and each of its officers is there to supply it.
I propose to ask health authorities to overhaul their machinery for handling inquiries from the public. I intend to suggest that in the first place each authority should look at the possibility of designating an officer to handle and follow-up inquiries. The ideal thing to do would be to publicise the name of this officer and to allot him a special, published telephone number, and a private office. I do not want to have these people coming along as they do in some health authorities, talking through a hatch and having their business discussed in a public way. I realise this may be open to certain objections, but at least the authority should set up a specific information office to deal with inquiries and, if they cannot be answered on the spot, to follow them up promptly and get in touch quickly with the inquirer.
I mentioned also the person who feels that the doctor or pharmacist has not met his medical or chemist requirements. I realise, of course, that where the complaint is that the treatment given was not what the patient thought he needed, it is more than likely that what the doctor did or provided was right and that the patient was wrong. Where, however, the complaint relates, for example, to delay on the part of the doctor or delay in getting a prescription for medicine filled, then if the person concerned can speedily contact a sympathetic officer in the authority who will inquire into the matter, do what he can to help out and get in touch with the inquirer quickly, a better service will result.
In conclusion, I would like to say that I think this has been a useful and interesting debate——
