---

Hospital-acquired Infections

9. Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD): What progress has been made in implementing, "Winning Ways", his Department's policy on hospital infections. [188509]

The Minister of State, Department of Health (Mr. John Hutton): The Department and the national health service are both actively implementing the initiatives contained in "Winning Ways", for example, through new local directors of infection control and a new hand hygiene campaign, which will help to meet our objective of reducing the incidence of MRSA—methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus—in the NHS.

Tom Brake: I thank the Minister for his response. He will be aware that isolating patients is a key tool in tackling MRSA and severe acute respiratory syndrome, yet I understand that no figures are available centrally on what isolation rooms are available in hospitals. Will he instigate a review to look at their availability nationwide to find out whether sufficient isolation facilities are available?

Mr. Hutton: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for those comments. We obviously keep such things under careful review, and one of the things that we have been saying to the NHS is that we want more single rooms to be built into new hospital provision. That is an effective way to help the NHS and hospitals to deal with incidents of MRSA infection because, as he says, isolation is very important. We are looking carefully at all those issues.

Mr. Andrew Miller (Ellesmere Port and Neston) (Lab): I welcome my right hon. Friend's initiatives on this matter, but when he publishes the data that he is collecting, will he be careful not to publish a crude league table, as that could be extremely misleading to people? We need to ensure that we are comparing apples with apples. When he publishes that data, will he also
 
14 Sept 2004 : Column 1120
 
include some information about the risks, putting them into perspective? One of the difficulties is helping the public to understand that we are talking about a very small risk.

Mr. Hutton: Again, I am grateful to my hon. Friend for those comments. We have been publishing information about MRSA bloodstream infections for some time. That information is widely available. Next year, we will publish further information about, for example, glycopeptide-resistant enterococci, DNV and orthopaedic surgical site infections. That is part of a suite of information that we want to be available to the public so that they can make informed and sensible choices—very much in the way that we have been encouraged to do by others.

Mr. Archie Norman (Tunbridge Wells) (Con): We had a very constructive debate on this issue last week, but may I ask the Minister specifically about the patient environment action team inspections and the rate of hospital infection? My local hospital in Tunbridge Wells was recently subject to an undercover investigation by the BBC that resulted in very worrying revelations about the standards of cleanliness, and the ubiquitous Professor Hugh Pennington declared it to be the worst that he had ever seen. That hospital was declared to be acceptable by the PEAT, as were all NHS hospitals last year. Will the Minister now accept that what was acceptable to the PEATs is now no longer acceptable as a standard in an MRSA world and that those inspections need thoroughly overhauling to be much more based on taking account of the general standard of hygiene and discipline in hospitals and probably involving microbiological tests specifically for MRSA in high-risk areas?

Mr. Hutton: Again, the hon. Gentleman is quite right: we had a constructive debate last week, and it shows the value of trying to approach these issues in that way rather than by jumping on political bandwagons and shroud-waving to raise anxieties and fears as, I am afraid, some have tried to do. I agree with him about that. I also agree that it is important that we take into account the best scientific advice and intelligence that is available to us on standards of hygiene and cleanliness in our hospitals. That is very much what the chief medical officer is trying to do and I will draw his attention to the hon. Gentleman's remarks.

General Practitioners

10. Mr. David Cameron (Witney) (Con): What recent representations he has received about out-of-hours cover for general practitioners; and if he will make a statement. [188510]

The Minister of State, Department of Health (Mr. John Hutton): I have received representations from right hon. and hon. Members, as well as from a number of different organisations. As a result of changes agreed by GPs and by the House last year, primary care trusts now have responsibility for arranging the provision of out-of-hours services, which must comply with national quality requirements, ensuring that patients continue to have access to GP home-visiting services.

Mr. Cameron: I thank the Minister for that reply, but is he aware that, in west Oxfordshire, out-of-hours cover
 
14 Sept 2004 : Column 1121
 
will no longer be provided by a doctor, but by a paramedic? Those requiring to see a doctor may have to travel to Abingdon, which can take up to an hour. If the point of all the extra money going into the NHS was to ensure a better service, can he explain why many of my constituents seem to be facing a worse service? Does he agree that the policy will have failed if all we get are longer queues at accident and emergency departments such as at the John Radcliffe? Will he ensure that the review that the Secretary of State announced earlier looks specifically at the situation in west Oxfordshire?

Mr. Hutton: I will certainly look at the situation in the hon. Gentleman's constituency. The advice that I have received is that the primary care trust is now providing the service itself, that local GPs are available as part of a multi-professional work force and that GP home visits are being made when that is necessary.

I will obviously take into account the hon. Gentleman's concerns. They are widespread and we have to respond to them. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has made it very clear today how we will do that. It is part of a process of change and not a completely new invention. In 1990, the previous Conservative Government gave GPs the right to opt out of providing out-of-hours services themselves and 95 per cent. of them did that. This is therefore the completion of that process, but it is very important, as we make this final change, that the patients and public are properly reassured about the level and quality of service that will be available to them. That will be enshrined in new national legally enforceable standards and requirements, guaranteeing the access of the hon. Gentleman's constituents to the sort of service that he has just been talking about.

Dr. Richard Taylor (Wyre Forest) (Ind): Can the Minister give the House any estimate of the difference in costs between the new methods of out-of-hours cover and the old methods?

Mr. Hutton: Sadly, the information that we used to collect on the cost of out-of-hours-services was not the most robust information that we had. The latest figures that I saw showed that the cost incurred by providing out-of-hours services was about £120 million. This year, we are providing £316 million to provide effective and comprehensive out-of-hours services. It is obviously crucial from our point of view as Ministers and for our accountability to the House that we can satisfy right hon. and hon. Members that that money is being spent to provide a sensible and comprehensive service. We will discharge that responsibility, because all of us understand the importance for our families and friends of people being able to access GP services out of hours. That will continue.

Vaccination

11. Dr. Vincent Cable (Twickenham) (LD): If he will make a statement on the launch of the new five-in-one vaccine. [188511]
 
14 Sept 2004 : Column 1122
 

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Miss Melanie Johnson): On 10 August, we announced that a new combined vaccine would be introduced for babies from the end of September onwards. While the current vaccines are very safe, the new vaccine is even safer. A range of clear factual information resources for parents and health professionals has been produced to support the programme.

Dr. Cable: Can the Minister explain the terrible confusion that arose at the launch when the Department of Health leaked to the press information about the new vaccine before GP surgeries had been informed of the detail? That resulted in the leading medical centre in my constituency approaching me because hundreds of calls had been received from anxious parents. In particular, can she clear up the issue of the safety of the old stock of vaccine?

Miss Johnson: There are no issues about safety in relation to this. As I said, the old vaccine is very safe and the new vaccine is even better for reasons that I can explain later.

On the hon. Gentleman's point about the leak, it was not a leak. I understand that a relatively junior member of staff in the Health Protection Agency informed somebody about the proposed change and that that person then informed a national newspaper. In consequence, about a week ahead of a letter that was proposed to go out informing the service—[Interruption.] But not from the Department of Health. It was not a Department of Health leak, but something from an agency that came out without the chief medical officer's letter that was due the following week. We got the letter out as quickly as we could and staff have been informed. I understand that the new vaccination is receiving a very warm welcome from people who welcome the development of the new safer vaccine that is offered by the five-in-one.

---