---

Medical Research

4. Ann McKechin (Glasgow, Maryhill) (Lab): If he will make a statement on his Department's funding of medical research. [169826]

The Secretary of State for Health (Dr. John Reid): We are making an additional £25 million available for medical research each year for the next four years. That increase of £100 million by 2007–08 will help to increase the total Government budget for medical research from £1billion a year to £1.2 billion a year by 2007–08.

I can tell the House that Birmingham Women's health care trust has won the bid to run the new £1.8 million genetics education and development centre, which will help to educate NHS staff about how they can use the latest genetic knowledge and techniques in the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of common diseases, such as breast cancer.

Ann McKechin : My right hon. Friend will be aware that there is a great deal of interest in gene therapy research, as it could provide a treatment not only for common diseases, such as heart disease and cancer, but for inherited conditions, such as muscular dystrophy. I understand that the Department has recently announced a funding package for further research in that area. Can my right hon. Friend confirm that research institutes throughout the United Kingdom, not just in London, will benefit from that new funding?
 
4 May 2004 : Column 1196
 

Dr. Reid: I can indeed confirm that. As my hon. Friend suggests, I recently announced another £4   million to support research into gene therapy in the United Kingdom—an area of scientific research where I can say with all due modesty and not the least complacency that this country is playing a leading role at the cutting edge, to the benefit of patients here as well as throughout the world. I can also confirm—my hon. Friend will be particularly pleased to hear this—that the beneficiaries of that £4 million grant include Dr. Linda Scobie of the university of Glasgow, who received £450,000 for very important research on the safety of retroviral vectors.

Mrs. Marion Roe (Broxbourne) (Con): Does the Secretary of State accept that the provisions of the Human Tissue Bill and the European Community clinical trials directive seriously undermine the increase in medical research funding that was announced in the Budget?

Dr. Reid: It is rather churlish of the hon. Lady not to accept that, when we announce an additional £200 million for scientific research, it in no way undermines the value of research that is conducted in this country for patients. On the Human Tissue Bill, we are responsible to the people of this country for ensuring that what happened in Alder Hey and other areas never happens again. People's bodies belong to them; we own our bodies and all their parts. We must therefore not presume but seek consent. If there are difficulties, we will listen—as we are currently listening—to an array of interested parties, including researchers, to ensure that the benefits from future research are balanced by the rights of individuals over their bodies.

Miss Anne Begg (Aberdeen, South) (Lab): I thank my right hon. Friend for the announcement of money for gene therapy. However, I emphasise that embryonic stem cell research is also important. The first licences have been issued and I look to the Secretary of State to promise that some of the money that is set aside for medical research will go into that area, which is so important, especially for people with neurological conditions.

Dr. Reid: I thank my hon. Friend for her comments. The subject is important and has potentially enormous benefits. We should be proud that the United Kingdom, with effectively 1 per cent. of the world's population, funds 4.5 per cent. of the world's science and produces 8 per cent. of the world's scientific publications and 9 per cent. of the world's citations. We maintain such a position only by continually making the resources available to the ingenuity, application and determination of the scientific community in this country. The ultimate benefit is to those who suffer from some of the diseases and illnesses that my hon. Friend mentioned and knows only too well. We shall continue to do all we can to alleviate that pain and distress.

Mr. Nick Gibb (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con): How much are the Department and the Food Standards Agency spending on research into the
 
4 May 2004 : Column 1197
 
carcinogen acrylamide, which appears in, for example, baked potatoes, chips, crisps and other food that is cooked at high temperatures?

Dr. Reid: I cannot give the hon. Gentleman a reply off the top of my head but I promise to write to him with the figures.

Day Surgery Facilities

5. Mr. James Plaskitt (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab): If he will make a statement on the expansion of day surgery facilities in the national health service. [169827]

The Minister of State, Department of Health (Mr. John Hutton): The Government are committed to expanding day surgery in the NHS. The proportion of elective care carried out on a day case basis has risen from 59 per cent. in 1996–97 to 67 per cent. in 2002–03. Our investment of £68 million in the past two years in day surgery facilities and more than £350 million in NHS and independent sector treatment centres will help to maintain that expansion.

Mr. Plaskitt : I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. We have a successful 23-hour ward in Warwick hospital. It opened in temporary accommodation in January but moved to its permanent site two weeks ago. It has already treated 600 patients and is contributing to a further reduction in waiting times and waiting lists at the hospital. Does my right hon. Friend agree that more such units will be needed if we are to reach our target of performing 75 per cent. of all elective surgery on a day care basis?

Mr. Hutton: Yes, I agree that we shall need more facilities such as the excellent example that he has drawn to the House's attention. I should like to put on record my appreciation of the hard work of staff in his local NHS trust and of the excellent service that they provide to his constituents. It is more convenient for patients to be treated on a day case basis and more efficient for the NHS. All Labour Members want the extra investment to which we are committed to make that difference in treatment for NHS patients.

Sir Sydney Chapman (Chipping Barnet) (Con): The Minister will know that the Audit Commission report for 2001 stated that there was scope for an additional 120,000 day surgery cases to be carried out with the facilities that were available then. What progress has been made on fulfilling that report's recommendations?

Mr. Hutton: As I said in my answer, we are treating more and more NHS patients as day cases, and that is an excellent way to ensure that the extra investment in the NHS reaches the front line and improves the service for all our constituents. There are now 850,000 more operations being done as day cases than in 1996–97, and I hope that the hon. Gentleman, who always takes a balanced and fair approach, will recognise that we are making good progress in this field.

Mr. Andrew Lansley (South Cambridgeshire) (Con): I am sure that the Minister will agree that increasing the
 
4 May 2004 : Column 1198
 
proportion of day case surgery is indeed a way of heightening efficiency in the NHS and that leading hospitals are already treating about 75 per cent. of elective in-patient admissions as day cases. Will the Minister therefore tell us why he and his colleagues are discussing—privately, in ministerial meetings—what is referred to as "official data" showing that productivity has fallen steadily since 1997, with a 10 per cent. decrease overall and a 15 to 20 per cent. decrease in health and education? On what statistics are Ministers basing that 15 to 20 per cent. reduction in health productivity? Will the Minister also tell the House why 200,000 finished consultant episodes, which in past years had been used for comparison, have mysteriously disappeared from the statistics in the Department's annual report on hospital activity trends, which he published 10 days ago?

Mr. Hutton: There is only one message that the hon. Gentleman wants to give to the people of the country and to Members of the House, and that is that the NHS is getting worse, but every published indicator reveals that it is getting better. In relation to his point about productivity, it is fair to say that the current measure of productivity fails to take into account some very important things that are going on in the NHS. One example is that we are making more statins—the cholesterol-busting drugs—available to all our constituents. As a result, fewer people who would have gone on to develop coronary heart disease will now need coronary artery bypass grafts and other procedures that we count as an activity in the NHS. So on one measurement, because we are making our constituents healthier, the NHS is said to be becoming less productive. What a ridiculous state of affairs! Anyone who has a reasonable view of these matters would say that the case for looking again at that measure of productivity was overwhelming.

---