Previous Section Index Home Page


A540

Mr. Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will ensure that Cheshire county council's case for borrowing approval in respect of the A540/Raby Road junction is examined immediately. [5444]

Mr. Norris: It is for Cheshire county council to decide the priority it attaches to minor improvement schemes on its roads. Each local highway authority gets on annual capital allocation of resources for such schemes. They have wide discretion on the use of these allocations.

A1

Mr. William O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what was the original estimated cost of the east of Knottingley A1 to Hook Moor highway development; what is now the estimate; and if he will make a statement. [5293]

Mr. Watts: The estimated cost of the east of Knottingley objector's alternative route is £176.6 million. The estimate was prepared immediately prior to the public inquiry following agreement by the promoter of the east of Knottingley route to the detailed plans.

Mr. O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Normanton of 30 November 1995, Official Report, column 351, what transcript system was used by the inspector doing the public inquiry into the A1 Ferrybridge to Hook Moor motorway proposals. [5289]

Mr. Watts: The conduct of inquiries concerned with Highways Act Orders is governed by the Highways (Inquiries Procedure) Rules 1994, SI 3263, which came into force on 10 January 1995. It is for the inspector to decide whether there should be any recording of statements. A transcript service is normally provided by the Department of Transport for trunk road inquiries which are expected to last more than 16 sitting days.

Motorways (Public Inquiries)

Mr. William O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the types of transcript services used in recording the proceedings at public inquiries into motorway developments. [5300]

Mr. Watts: I have asked the chief executive of the Highways Agency to write to the hon. Member.

13 Dec 1995 : Column: 674

Letter from Lawrie Haynes to Mr. William O'Brien, dated 13 December 1995:


Mr. O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what changes have taken place since 1976 to the rules concerning motorway public inquiries. [5295]

Mr. Watts: The Highways (Inquiries Procedure) Rules 1994, SI 1994 No. 3263, came into force on 10 January 1995 replacing the 1976 rules. I am writing to the hon. Member explaining the changes brought about by the new rules.

A63

Mr. Cran: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects the construction of the A63 Melton grade separated junction to begin. [5133]

Mr. Watts: The A63 Melton grade separated junction scheme remains in the main programme. Further development work will be taken forward when resources become available.

Departmental Cars

Mr. Macshane: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the cost of chauffeur-driven cars used by his Department in each of the past five years. [5849]

Mr. Norris: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to him on 28 November 1995 Official Report, column 549.

ScotRail

Mr. George Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many staff have left ScotRail since January 1993 under redundancy or early retirement arrangements; and what has been the total cost of payments made to those staff. [5513]

Mr. Watts [holding answer 12 December 1995]: The total number of staff to leave the ScotRail Train Operating Company since 1 April 1994 equates to 218 staff at a cost of £3,475,500. ScotRail became a separately identified organisation within British Rail on 1 April 1994. Figures for the period prior to that date are available only at a disproportionate cost.

Speed Limits (Paddington-Plymouth Line)

Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his answer of 21 November, Official Report, column 54-5, what is the estimated cost of obtaining the details in respect of the 16 speed restrictions in place between Paddington and Plymouth. [5030]

13 Dec 1995 : Column: 675

Mr. Watts [holding answer 11 December 1995]: I refer the hon. member to my reply of 21 November, Official Report columns 54-55.

Newbury Bypass

Mr. Byers: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport on what date the decision was taken to give the go-ahead to a bypass at Newbury; who took the decision; what is the estimated cost of the scheme; and what is the estimate of the total amount for the acquisition of land for the scheme. [5326]

Mr. Watts [holding answer 12 December 1995]: The decision to go ahead with the Newbury bypass was taken by the then Secretary of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Dr. Mawhinney), and announced on 5 July.

The estimated cost of the scheme is £101 million, excluding VAT.

The estimated cost of land acquisition is £82.5 million.

HEALTH

In-patient Episodes

Mr. Redmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is his latest estimate of the average cost per in-patient episode. [4494]

Mr. Horam: The information is shown in the table. Figures relate to the net expenditure incurred on hospital specialities and include overhead costs. The figures are based on patients using a bed, including day cases, and relate to finished consultant episodes.

Average cost per patient episode in England

Average cost per episode £
1992-931,240
1993-941,163
1994-951,092

Figures for 1994-95 are provisional.Source:Annual financial returns of regions, districts and special health authorities for the London postgraduate hospitals and NHS trusts.


Rubella Notifications

Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 8 November 1995, Official Report, column 978, what are the reasons for the differences in rubella notifications between 1992 and 1993. [5043]

Mr. Horam: The number of rubella cases for 1992 was 201.

There was a large increase in rubella notifications, and laboratory confirmed infections, in 1993. The majority of cases were in young men, who form a pool of susceptibles to the disease.

Vaccination

Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 8 November, Official

13 Dec 1995 : Column: 676

Report, column 976, on the report of the Public Health Laboratory Service on advance techniques for the surveillance of adverse reactions to measles, mumps and rubella immunisations; and if he will (a) put a copy of the report in the Library and (b) initiate a study to evaluate the adequacy of the present arrangements to monitor adverse reactions to the MR campaign. [5045]

Mr. Horam: A copy of the paper by Farrington P Et al in The Lancet entitled, "A new method for active surveillance for diphtheria/tetanus/pertussis and measles/mumps/rubella vaccines" is available in the Library.

Monitoring of adverse reactions during the 1994 measles/rubella immunisation campaign was based on the yellow card scheme for reporting of suspected adverse reactions to all medicines by doctors, dentists and coroners. This scheme has been in operation since 1964 and its effectiveness in identifying possible safety hazards is well recognised. All reactions reported as suspected to be due to MR vaccine were handled as high priority. These monitoring arrangements proved more than adequate and there is no need for the suggested study. A report on adverse reactions reported to MR vaccine has been published in "Current Problems in Pharmacovigilance", which was distributed to all doctors in November 1995, copies of this publication are available in the Library.

Mr. Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health further to his departmental report, "Measles Rubella Immunisation Campaign in England--One Year On", published in November, page 1, what is the basis for his statement in respect of the recovery of the children who suffered immediate serious adverse reactions. [5050]

Mr. Horam: Information about recovery from immediate serious adverse reactions following immunisation with measles/rubella vaccine was obtained as part of detailed follow-up from doctors who reported these reactions on yellow cards. All children with immediate serious reactions recovered regardless of whether or not the reaction was likely to have been caused by the vaccine.

Mr. Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 8 November, Official Report, column 976, on the effects of the notification of the natural immunological response by vaccines in relation to the increase in auto-immune diseases, if he will publish in the Official Report the letter of reply sent to the hon. Member. [5024]

Mr. Horam: The letter my hon. Friend the then Under-Secretary of State gave the hon. Gentleman on 8 November is as follows.

I look forward to receiving the further clarification requested from the hon. Member and I will then publish a final reply in the Official Report.

Letter from Tom Sackville to Mr. Llew Smith, dated 8 November 1995:


13 Dec 1995 : Column: 677

Mr. Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 8 November, Official Report, column 975, on the disposal of surplus measles vaccines, what was the value of the reimbursement credit for the vaccines returned to the manufacturers; and what arrangements have been made to activate the credit in future. [5022]

Mr. Horam: For reasons of commercial confidentiality, it is not the practice for the Department of Health to disclose such information. All of the sum reimbursed has been used against other subsequent vaccine purchases.

Mr. Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 8 November 1995, Official Report, column 977, if he will list the documents which were sent to doctors and other health professionals on adverse reactions to the MMR vaccinations; and for what reasons each respective document was chosen as suitable to pass on to the health professionals involved in administering the campaign. [5042]

Mr. Horam: Information concerning possible adverse reactions to measles/rubella vaccine and guidance on the reporting of such reactions was contained in many of the letters and circulars issued to doctors during the planning and implementation of the measles/rubella immunisation campaign. The documents were prepared specifically for the campaign and contained information about the adverse reactions which health professionals might most commonly see during the course of the campaign. Information addressing the more specific concerns which it was thought might arise was also provided. In addition, the Department's memorandum "Immunisation Against Infectious Disease", which is issued to all doctors, and the British National Formulary contain information about possible adverse reactions to vaccines. The principal documents issued for the campaign, copies of which are in the Library, were:



Next Section Index Home Page