| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Pensioners (Free Treatment)
Mr. O'Hara: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will estimate the annual cost of extending free optical and dental treatment to all state pensioners. [90698]
Mr. Denham:
From 1 April everyone aged 60 and over has been eligible for free National Health Service sight tests. If this group were also made eligible for spectacle vouchers, regardless of income, the additional cost would be about £100 million per annum. Hospital optical treatment is provided free of charge to all NHS patients. The annual cost of extending free dental treatment to all state pensioners is estimated at a minimum of about £100 million assuming no increase in the volume of dental services provided to this age group.
19 Jul 1999 : Column: 416
Mr. Bob Russell:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will name the company to which it is intended to sell the former Severalls Hospital at Colchester; at what price it is to be sold; and when he expects the sale to be completed. [90707]
Mr. Denham:
No contracts for sale have yet been signed nor have solicitors been instructed to draw up a contract. Discussions for a potential sale are continuing with terms yet to be agreed. It would be prejudicial at this stage to name the parties with whom negotiations are being conducted or to disclose terms of a potential sale including expectations on price or value. Parts of Severall Hospital are, of course, occupied for National Health Service needs and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future.
If negotiations are successful, completion could be by early 2000.
Mr. Burstow:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list the non-departmental public bodies in existence on 1 May 1997 that (a) have been disbanded, indicating when they were disbanded, (b) will be disbanded in the next 12 months, (c) have had their functions transferred to (i) another non-departmental public body and (ii) a democratically elected body, (d) have been renamed but continue to perform a similar role and (e) have been unchanged; if he will indicate in (c)(ii) the relevant successor body; what new non-departmental public bodies have been established since 1 May 1997; and how many non-departmental public bodies his Department currently is responsible for. [90669]
Ms Jowell:
Of the non-Departmental public bodies (NDPBs) in existence on 1 May 1997: (a) the Advisory Committee on Design Quality in the National Health Service was abolished on 20 July 1998, the Royal Commission on Long Term Care was abolished on 1 May 1999, and the Standing Committee on Postgraduate Medical Education was abolished on 1 April 1999; (b) The Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing, the Human Genetics Advisory Commission and the Clinical Standards Advisory Group will be disbanded in the next 12 months. The Central Council on Education and Training for Social Work (an executive NDPB) will be abolished by 31 March 2001; (c) None has had their functions transferred (i) to another non-departmental public body or (ii) to a democratically elected body; and (d) none has been re-named.
Since 1 May 1997 the following NDPBs have been established: the Royal Commission on Long Term Care of the Elderly (now abolished); and the Genetics and Insurance Committee. The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens, which was a departmental committee, has been reclassified as an advisory NDPB. The Nurses', Midwives and other NHS Professions' Review Body, Doctors and Dentists Review Panel and the Pharmacists' Review Panel were inherited by the Department from the Office of Manpower and Economics during the period. The Department is responsible for 7 executive and 39 advisory NDPBs.
19 Jul 1999 : Column: 417
The status of the Advisory Committee on Breast Cancer Screening, the National Specialist Commissioning Advisory Group and the Microbiology Advisory Committee have been reclassified by the Cabinet Office and no longer have NDPB status: they are now regarded as Departmental bodies.
Mr. Tredinnick:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will evaluate the recent study on the effects of radiation from VDUs at the offices of Southampton and South West Hampshire Health Authority; and if he will make a statement. [91923]
Ms Jowell:
This recent study claims to show that office staff who use visual display units (VDUs) experience various adverse health reactions which can be relieved by a device fitted to the VDU screen.
The Government obtain advice from the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) on risks to health from exposure to electromagnetic fields. NRPB's Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation evaluated in detail the health effects of working with VDUs and published a report in 1994 "Health Effects Related to the Use of Visual Display Units" (Documents of the NRPB Volume 5, No2--copies of which are available in the Library). The Advisory Group concluded that exposure to radiation resulting from the use of VDUs causes no significant health effects. In responding to this recent study NRPB have commented that since the publication of their 1994 report, no research published in peer reviewed journals has led to a change to this conclusion.
Mr. Tredinnick:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health if, in its assessment of radiation, the National Radiological Protection Board takes account of non-thermal effects; and if he will make a statement. [91919]
Ms Jowell:
I have been advised by the National Radiological Protection Board that there is a consensus among national and international expert bodies that standards for protection of people from electromagnetic fields (EMF) should be based upon sound scientific evidence of established effects on human health. This is also the view of NRPB. For low frequencies, standards are set to prevent effects on the central nervous system and to avoid shocks. For higher frequencies they are set to prevent damage due to heating of body tissues. Concerns about other, so-called athermal effects arising from exposure to EMFs have also been raised. These include suggestions of subtle effects on cells that could affect cancer development or of influences on electrically excitable tissue that could influence the function of the brain and nervous tissue.
While mindful, therefore, that some scientific data challenge the conventional assumptions upon which protection standards are based, NRPB has concluded that biological interactions resulting from such effects are neither well defined nor understood. Additionally, there is no convincing biological evidence that electromagnetic fields could cause cancer or other athermal effects. The basis for its recommendations is therefore established biological effects.
19 Jul 1999 : Column: 418
Mr. Tredinnick:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what reports he has received of research by the USA National Institute of Environmental Health Systems into the effect of extremely low-frequency radiation; and if he will make a statement. [91921]
Ms Jowell:
The Department has been advised that the National Radiological Protection Board is aware of a report published by the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) on 15 June 1999. The Report to Congress on the US EMF (Electromagnetic Field) Research and Public Information Dissemination Programme indicates that
Ms Jowell:
Research into potential effects of microwaves, such as those emitted by mobile phones, is being undertaken on a worldwide basis. The Department is contributing to these international initiatives and is also supporting its own research. A programme of research and exposure assessment is being carried out at the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB). The NRPB has recently been asked to set up a working group to assess the current state of research into the use of mobile phones. The Chairman, Sir William Stewart has been appointed and the membership and terms of references will be announced shortly.
The NRPB also keeps the safety of Visual Display Units under review. It has concluded that exposure to radiation resulting from the use of VDUs causes no significant adverse health effects.
Mr. Tredinnick:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what part the provision of complementary and alternative medicines plays in the drug strategy for the South London area. [91805]
Ms Jowell:
It is for health and local authorities to decide the type and level of drug treatment services that are provided and commissioned in their areas. This includes use of alternative and complementary therapies.
"the NIEHS believes that the probability that EMF is truly a health hazard is currently small. The weak epidemiological associations and lack of laboratory support for these associations provide only marginal scientific support that exposure to this agent causes any degree of harm".
Mr. Tredinnick:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to conduct research into the emissions from mobile phones and VDUs of extremely low-frequency radiation; and if he will make a statement. [91922]
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |