| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Lots of the questions that the hon. Lady asked deal with the issues to which our minds are now turning—the preparedness of the NHS to deal with the pressure that it will face in the coming weeks, and the logistics of the systems that we are putting in place to make sure that we can provide credible alternative routes, so that people do not have to go straight to their general practitioner. If they did, GPs’ other business would, as life went on, become more and more difficult. She is absolutely right to ask about and probe us on those issues. All our efforts are now fully engaged on that task.
I shall try to deal with some of the questions that the hon. Lady raised. On NHS staff, currently the advice is that they are to be offered prophylactic treatment after contact with flu patients. We have proposed that there be special arrangements for staff in the treatment phase. That is being looked at again by Ministers, and I will update the House as and when necessary. The issue will be considered at next week’s Cobra meeting. We will, of course, update the House at that point.
The hon. Lady asked about the preparedness of PCTs and asked whether there were variants. That is a question that I have raised; again, it will be raised at the Cobra meeting next week. I said in response to the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire that all PCTs have been assessed, and their readiness to stand up collection points within seven days has been confirmed, but the hon. Lady is right to say that the quality of preparedness may vary from one place to another. I will respond to her on that point as and when we have more information that we can place in the public domain. However, she should feel reassured that a considerable amount of attention has gone into the matter, and that PCTs in all parts of the country are ready to step up to the challenge that they will face.
I neglected to deal with a point that the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire raised. The Department of Health has provided surge capacity guidance more generally to the NHS, with advice on a range of measures, including on cancellation of elective surgery being brought into play when local circumstances require it. He asked whether we had issued such guidance; I can confirm that we have. I can provide more details to him, if that would be helpful.
The hon. Member for Romsey (Sandra Gidley) mentioned the weather. I am not sure that it is playing a role. However, we are seeing spread during a part of the year when we would not normally expect to see considerable spread. If there is more that we can tell her, we will do so. We believe that now is a good moment to reiterate our communications messages through public-facing, simple and clear documents that can be issued more widely. One of them is perhaps more for people working in local government and other parts of the public sector, but I will take on board what she said about repeating our leaflet and other messaging campaigns. She is right to say that we need to be on top of providing clear and consistent communications at all times.
Pharmacies may have a role as collection points in some parts of the country, where primary care trusts have deemed that to be appropriate. Of course, we will ensure that they are in the communications loop, because the issues may impact on their day-to-day job anyway. On the question about rural areas—
Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby) (Con): Is this a speech?
Andy Burnham: I am answering the questions. In response to the point on rural areas, we ensure that representatives from the Local Government Association are invited to all meetings of the Ministerial Committee on Civil Contingencies. Of course, PCTs, particularly in rural areas, will give particular attention to the issues that the hon. Lady raises.
Finally, on swine flu parties, the best thing that I can say is that if anybody receives an invitation to one, they should politely turn it down. The chief medical officer said yesterday:
“It is seriously flawed thinking to allow the virus to spread unabated through ‘swine flu parties’.”
We hope that that message will be heard loud and clear by anybody who is planning such a party, or plans to attend one.
Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent, North) (Lab): I welcome my right hon. Friend’s careful, considered and co-ordinated approach, but on behalf of laryngectomy patients in my constituency and in north Staffordshire, may I ask him whether he will pay particular regard to their concerns about the need for a special filter, the micron filter, for neck breathers? Will he make inquiries of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and find out whether, despite the delays so far in getting approval from NICE, that approval can be hurried through the system, so that people who are particularly highly prone to infection can receive some safeguards and support in this difficult time of swine flu?
Andy Burnham: My hon. Friend raises an important question. I have to say to her that I do not have the answer to hand, but I will get an answer for her. Of course, we want to ensure that no vulnerable group is exposed to risk in this period, so I will get back to her on the subject.
Dr. Andrew Murrison (Westbury) (Con): It is good to hear that a vaccine for H1N1 will be available in the autumn, but of course that is about the time when elderly and vulnerable people would ordinarily expect to be vaccinated for seasonal flu. I assume that the Department of Health’s position is that that vaccination should go ahead. It would be useful to have the Minister’s confirmation that he will attempt to deconflict advice on H1N1 and seasonal flu, because obviously there is considerable scope for confusion on the subject.
Andy Burnham: I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman’s comments. Of course, the measures do not conflict with the seasonal flu vaccination programme. If we need to improve guidance on the subject, then of course we will do so. As I indicated, there is a decision to be taken about the time scale and the prioritisation of how vaccine is made available once it is received. Stocks will begin to arrive in August. They will build up in September and October, but obviously we will not be able to treat everybody until later in the year. However, that has to be carefully planned alongside the seasonal flu vaccination programme. We will ensure that once decisions are taken, clear guidance is given to general practitioners in that regard.
Richard Burden (Birmingham, Northfield) (Lab):
My right hon. Friend will know that Birmingham is one of the areas most extensively affected by swine flu. May I endorse what he and others have said about expressing
thanks to all the NHS staff who have worked so hard over the period? On Monday this week, another south Birmingham MP and I met South Birmingham primary care trust to talk about the situation in south Birmingham. I understand what my right hon. Friend is saying about the evidence perhaps moving us towards greater consideration of more targeted approaches, but I am sure that he is right to adopt the cautious approach. So far, the PCT has a very good record of keeping in touch with MPs daily, with updates and guidance about what is being provided in the area. May I put it to him that it is important that that continues, and is perhaps generalised elsewhere, particularly as we move towards the treatment phase?
Andy Burnham: I thank my hon. Friend for that. It was a visit that I made to Birmingham a fortnight ago that really gave me a clear picture of the pressure on staff on the ground in the west midlands. It was impressive to see how the HPA works with colleagues from across the health service in the west midlands, and with local government. The visit also showed how staff had been tested. I was tremendously impressed by how they had come through that test and provided a very good service to his constituents. Those staff do indeed deserve our praise.
I am pleased that my hon. Friend says that he feels that we have taken the right approach. The science is pointing towards a more targeted approach; we need to be clear about that. It is likely that we will move in that direction at some point, although I do not think that anybody in this House would feel that a finely balanced judgment on the science would, at this stage, allow us to move a couple of steps further than we want to go. We proceed with a step-by-step approach, and I am pleased to hear that he feels that that is the right approach to take.
Information for MPs is very important; the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire (Mr. Lansley) asked me about availability of information during the summer break. This is incredibly important. I shall take the point back, and see whether, as we move into the treatment phase, PCTs, without being placed under any undue burden, can offer to colleagues throughout the House a simple, regular breakdown of local information that would help inform Members and councillors about the situation on the ground. I shall take back that suggestion, which would help keep the House updated over the summer. At the same time, however, I would not want to place any undue burden on primary care trusts. We will look at that very sensible suggestion and let my hon. Friend know the decision.
Richard Younger-Ross (Teignbridge) (LD):
I thank the Minister for his comments to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey (Sandra Gidley) on public information. He will be aware that I wrote to him in early June about Kenton in my constituency, which did not receive the initial leaflet. When will those areas that missed out receive such leaflets? I also emphasise the point about public information and encouraging people not to go to work or other public places, but to keep their virus at home, so that they do not spread it to people at risk, in particular, such as the elderly. Will the Minister therefore talk to people such as church representatives? Churches still encourage people to attend
every Sunday, but if we take our flu virus and give it to the elderly person sat next to us, we might send some people to meet their maker earlier than we want them to.
Andy Burnham: I shall certainly look into the question of leaflet distribution. There were some complaints from my own constituency, I have to say—before I took this job, obviously. It is also important to point out that the website offers the same advice, and that leaflets are available in public places. That said, it is important that we get as much as information as possible into the home.
The hon. Gentleman spoke about advising people to stay at home, which is incredibly important. That relates to the point about swine flu parties. We do not yet know enough about the condition. We can say that it is mild, although some cases have been more severe, so the advice is to go home and rest, take plenty of fluids, and take paracetamol—the usual things that we all do. That is the advice for people, and if they are symptomatic, they really should not continue with their normal life, because it could add to the spread of the disease. The fact that the hon. Gentleman has raised the point may have allowed a few people watching the Parliament channel to hear it again.
Barry Gardiner (Brent, North) (Lab): In this phase or in respect of any future recurrence of the pandemic, is there a need to expand the capacity of isolation units, such as that at Northwick Park hospital in my constituency, and will central funding be made available to trusts to upgrade these nationally important resources?
Andy Burnham: My hon. Friend has raised that point with me before, and it is incredibly important. Hospitals are able to provide isolation facilities, but as cases increased, that would become progressively more difficult. These issues are kept under very careful review, and Ian Dalton is the NHS lead on preparedness for pandemic flu. I shall ask that he write to my hon. Friend on this particular issue and give him a full answer on the situation not just around the country but in his constituency.
Mr. Roger Williams (Brecon and Radnorshire) (LD): I support the Secretary of State’s decision to cease the routine prophylactic use of antivirals for the contacts of people who have the disease. I heard what he said to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey (Sandra Gidley) about keeping prophylactic use in hospitals and other health services under consideration, but I hope that he will not rule out prophylactic use for vulnerable individuals or groups of individuals whose health is compromised in some way and may be more severely affected by the disease than the average person.
Andy Burnham:
That is an important point, and of course we would not rule out such a possibility. However,
the judgment should be made locally. Where particularly vulnerable people are close to somebody who has come down with the illness, we want it to be clinicians and GPs who take those issues into account, when dealing with the patient.
Dr. Howard Stoate (Dartford) (Lab): May I join my right hon. Friend in recognising the almost unique ability of British primary care to deal with such an outbreak, and thank him for his kind words on all the hard work that staff do? Of course, that includes GPs, practice nurses, pharmacists and any other support staff.
There is a problem, however, as primary care could become overwhelmed if the pandemic takes off as predicted. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that the public are informed through a regular information campaign, operating daily, to let them know precisely what they should do in certain circumstances? Many people do not have access to the internet and many do not read newspapers, but they need to be kept well informed almost daily about the changing situation and how they ought to respond should they be struck down with an illness.
Andy Burnham: The House has been debating second jobs this week, and my hon. Friend’s second job is particularly useful in this regard. He is not only representing his constituents here on swine flu, but treating them, and my praise of GPs of course extends to him.
We are very conscious of the ability of primary care to cope, and although the national pandemic flu service is new, we think it is important to send out the message today and consistently about why it is important for people, where they can, to use that alternative route to secure treatment. There will continue to be patients who will wish to go to their GP, and that is right and proper; I am sure that my hon. Friend agrees and does not want any heavy-handed interference. We want to encourage the vast majority of people, however—particularly those to whom the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire referred, such as young people who want to get on with life—to use the new access routes that we are creating. I agree that because the routes are new, it is important that they are communicated clearly and regularly, so that people are not in any doubt. Regular public information will be important as we enter a phase in which the numbers of cases rise. As I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Richard Burden), I would not want us to place undue burdens on the service in asking it to churn or crank out statistics when it should be doing other things, but public information is very important in such a situation. I take very seriously what my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Dr. Stoate) said, and I shall see what is the appropriate level of information to put out regularly.
Points of Order
1.7 pm
Mr. Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green) (Con): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I ask for your clarification, because yesterday we heard a Minister from the other place on broadcasts such as the “Today” programme, in particular, making a very clear announcement—I know, because I have checked the transcripts—that the Government were essentially going to nationalise the company running the east coast main line franchise. The announcement was made on two or three occasions; it was raised in the House yesterday; and Mr. Speaker was somewhat misdirected, although he was prepared to be corrected in the sense that he was not aware of that. I have handed him the transcript and a request that he now make a statement about it. Today, however, we did not hear anything.
Are you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, aware of whether Mr. Speaker has now reached any conclusions about this matter, and whether he plans to make any statement at all about the Government’s disgraceful behaviour in not coming to this House until very late in the evening—after most people had gone? The other place heard a statement much earlier, and we had an indication from a Minister on a broadcast that some very important act was taking place, but this House was literally the last place in Britain to hear about it.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst): I think that I can do no better than refer the right hon. Gentleman to the responses that Mr. Speaker gave last evening on his considered reflections on the situation that had been raised with him earlier in the day. I think that Mr. Speaker expressed his satisfaction that, on the nature of the statement, nothing very different could have happened. The Secretary of State was obviously confronted with a very unusual situation; there was then a separate matter as to when that could be brought before this House; and there is always a dilemma for the Speaker, when he has timetabled business in the House of a very special nature relating to the House, as to whether it is proper to take further time out of that in order to advance a ministerial statement to this House. I think that it was a combination of very special circumstances, and Mr. Speaker, having reflected on it, gave the judgment he gave, which is in Hansard, last evening.
Mr. Simon Burns (West Chelmsford) (Con): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I seek your advice and help. Since he became Speaker, Mr. Speaker has on a number of occasions deprecated to the House the habit of giving information on policy to the media before it is announced in the House. That is right.
I am sure that Mr. Speaker is as concerned as I am about the fact that his statement today was a significant story on the BBC news website half an hour before he made it. That suggests that it was leaked to the BBC. I was wondering whether Mr. Speaker would like to carry
out an inquiry to try to find out how the statement was leaked and given to the corporation prior to its being made in the House.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The hon. Gentleman could not possibly expect me to comment. Mr. Speaker will take note of what the hon. Gentleman has put on the record, but I could not possibly begin to opine about what may have occurred. I should just add that the fact that Mr. Speaker was going to make a statement was certainly in the public arena, in the sense that it was displayed on the annunciators in the House. I know no more than that.
Mr. Burns: Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I assure you that although the fact that Mr. Speaker was to make a statement was on the monitors, in no shape or form was it clear what the statement would be about. The other point is that if the Government have to bring statements here first rather than leaking them, no one—whether it is the Government or any other body with advance notice—should leak Mr. Speaker’s statements to the media.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I cannot speculate about that. I say again to the hon. Gentleman that he has put his concerns on the record. If something injudicious or accidental has occurred, there will no doubt be opportunity for further comment. The issue is hardly more urgent than that.
Mr. Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley) (Lab): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We have heard through speculation in the press and noises from another place that the part-privatisation of the Royal Mail has been dropped. Can we expect a statement in the House on the matter, and has any notice been given of such a statement?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I know of no intention to make such a statement; it would have been appropriate for the hon. Gentleman to have made his point to the Leader of the House during business questions. He makes it on a point of order now, and I am not in a position to give an answer. At present, I know of no such intention. [Interruption.] Order. I say to the hon. Members for East Worthing and Shoreham (Tim Loughton) and for Chorley (Mr. Hoyle) that an across-the-House discussion about multi-tasking is not appropriate at this moment.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |