MAJORITY REPORT.
1GC
_
——
tion of sending the prescriptions to the bureaux and, on their
return, making out the cheques.
COMPLAINTS.
385. The procedure for dealing with complaints does raise
matters of some moment. A judicial function has to be per-
formed and members of the Committees are called upon to take
their part in this. As a complaint may lead to the institution cf
a Court of Inquiry by the Minister and the finding of that Court
may involve the removal of a doctor or chemist from the panel
1t 1s obvious that important issues are involved. Indeed it is
in this part of the work that we find the only really substantial
element in the Insurance Committee's work. We refer to para-
graphs 40-49 of Appendix I, Section C, for a description of the
procedure for dealing with complaints, and to paragraphs 55-56
of the same Appendix for an account of the procedure for
removing practitioners or chemists from the lists.
_ 386. The problem of complaints is, as we have said,
Important in character. If it were large in volume
there might be some justification for continuing the
Insurance = Committees on this score. But it is not
large in volume. In the evidence of Mr. Brock we find (Q. 1070)
that the total number of complaints against insurance practitioners
which have been investigated by the Medical Service Sub-
Committees of the Insurance Committees between 1st April,
1920, and 31st October, 1924, was 1,819 for England and Wales.
Of the 1,819, 735 resulted in the doctor being acquitted or the
case not substantiated. Bul taking the total, the number of
complaints against doctors per Committee per year is rather less
than 3. Even when the complaints against chemists are added
(and they are, we understand, equally insignificant in number)
It cannot be said that there is here justification for a specially
constituted body. We have to bear in mind that the inquiry
1S not made in the first instance by the Insurance Committee
Itself but by a specially set up Sub-Committee which reports to
the Insurance Committee. Such an investigating committee
could, we think, equally well be set up by the Local Authority.
387. Of course, the number of cases of complaints dealt with
by an Insurance Committee, though small on the average, may
be substantial in the larger urban areas. In London, for example,
the number of cases against practitioners dealt with in 1923 was
104 and about 40 cases against chemists arose in the four years
1920-1924. (London Insurance Committee App. XCVIII, 31,
48.) The Medical Service Sub-Committee is in this case, No
doubt, kept fairly busy. But such a Committee could equally
Well be appointed by and report to the general Local Authority.