| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Written Answers
Thursday, 18th December 1997.
Zambian Constitution: Restrictive Provision
Viscount Exmouth asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether, during their Presidency of the European Union, they will promote a suspension of Community aid to Zambia, until such time as the Zambian Government reverse the amendment to the constitution, adopted in 1996, which limits the number of aspiring presidential candidates.
Lord Whitty: We will be discussing with the Government of Zambia whether we are able to establish a partnership with them on the basis outlined in the White Paper on International Development as a foundation for future aid commitments. We will continue to consult with our EU partners on this basis.
Disability Benefits: Lifetime Awards
Lord Morris of Manchester asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What advice they have taken on the legality of reducing or withdrawing from a disabled person any disability benefit awarded to her or to him for life.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Social Security (Baroness Hollis of Heigham): Awards of Disability Living Allowance and Attendance Allowance are made "for life" where the disabled person is likely to continue to satisfy the qualifying criteria for that award. That does not mean that they will. A person's needs may increase if their condition deteriorates or their needs may decrease as they adapt to a disability or their condition improves.
The Government considers that the law dealing with the review of awards is clear. The Social Security Administration Act 1992 sets out, at section 30(2), the grounds for reviewing awards of Disability Living Allowance and Attendance Allowance. Section 32(4)(b) of the same Act, as amended by section 17(2) of the Social Security Administration (Fraud) Act 1997, makes it clear that section 30(2) can also be applied to awards that have been made for life.
SERPS
Baroness Castle of Blackburn asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they will give an undertaking that their election commitment to retain SERPS "as an option for those who wish to remain in it" does not mean that SERPS will gradually be phased out but that it will be retained as an option for those who wish to join it in the future.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: As stated in our manifesto, the Government are committed to retaining SERPS as an option for those who wish to remain in it. This includes new entrants to the labour force.
Representations on the future of SERPS beyond the present Parliament, including those submitted by the right honourable Baroness, are being considered as part of our pensions review.
Public Health Risks Policies
Viscount Simon asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they are satisfied that their policy on controlling the sale of meat products is consistent with their policy on controlling the sale of tobacco products, given the medical evidence available in each case of the likely impact on human health.
The Minister of State, Department of Health (Baroness Jay of Paddington): We are satisfied that the actions taken to protect the public from any health risk, however small, from possible exposure to bovine spongiform encephalopathy are justified. In the light of the advice from the Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC) and the Chief Medical Officer, we decided that we could not risk public health by allowing a tissue in which infectivity had been found to remain in the human food chain.
Many factors need to be taken into account when assessing the appropriate measures to address risks to public health associated with different products or activities. We are satisfied that our response to the public health risks in smoking and eating beef is appropriate in both cases.
Fluoridation of Water
Earl Baldwin of Bewdley asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Jay of Paddington on 12 November (WA 34), whether they agree with the statement in WHO Technical Report Series 846: Fluorides and oral health (WHO, 1994) that "It is uncontrolled exposure to fluoride, sometimes from unsuspected sources, that is the principal health concern."
Baroness Jay of Paddington: No health concerns have been identified in respect of current exposures of the general population of the United Kingdom to fluoride. Concentrations in drinking water supplies are subject to a statutory maximum of 1.5 milligrams per litre. Furthermore, when the naturally-occurring fluoride concentration is supplemented by fluoridation, it is a statutory requirement to maintain the concentration in supply at 1 milligram per litre so far as is reasonably practical. Dental fluorosis, which is mentioned in the section of the World Health Organisation report quoted, is accepted as a purely cosmetic problem for which there are satisfactory dental remedies.
Earl Baldwin of Bewdley asked Her Majesty's Government:
- In view of Conclusion 13.1.2 in WHO Technical Report Series 846: Fluorides and oral health (WHO, 1994) to the effect that "Dental public health administrators should be aware of the total fluoride exposure in the population before introducing any additional fluoride programme for caries prevention", what steps have been taken to monitor the exposure of populations subject to proposed water fluoridation schemes in the last five years.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: Schemes proposed in the last five years have been in areas with high levels of tooth decay in which naturally occurring levels of fluoride in the water supply are low and it may be assumed that the use by residents of topical applications of fluoride is also low. If artificial fluoridation were introduced to an area, the health authority would mount a publicity campaign advising people of the situations in which they no longer needed topical fluoride.
Committee on Toxicity and Vitamin B6
The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Further to the Answer by Baroness Jay of Paddington on 2 December (H.L. Deb., col. 1237) to the effect that they are looking at the best ways to "ensure that other voices and opinions, such as those of consumer groups and other lay interests, are taken into account" by the Committee on Toxicity, whether they intend to bring forward proposals for the reform of the procedures and structure of that committee; if so, when; and whether having introduced such changes they will then make it their policy to ask the committee to review its advice on Vitamin B6 safety.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Government are currently considering the ways of increasing the openness and transparency of the Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (COT), as well as other expert advisory committees. As these arrangements have not been finalised it is not possible to say when they will be implemented.
The Government have every confidence in the rigour with which the COT reviewed the Vitamin B6 data and in the robustness of the recommendations it made. We have no intention to ask the COT to review its advice.
Vitamin B6
The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What assessment they have made of the numbers of individuals who regularly take more than
49 milligrams daily of Vitamin B6 supplements; and what would be the resource implications for the National Health Service if a significant percentage of
- that group in future sought their supplements from general medical practitioners.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: It is impossible to estimate the number of people who regularly take any dose of Vitamin B6 since it is sold over the counter. Therefore, it is not possible to assess the resource implication for the National Health Service if the number of people seeking higher doses of Vitamin B6 were to consult their general medical practitioner.
The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty's Government:
- How many deaths were recorded in England and Wales:
(a) as a sole result of excessive Vitamin B6 supplementation;
(b) tobacco related illness; and
(c) alcohol related illness
in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available; and why, in the light of those figures, the proposed restrictions on the retail sale of Vitamin B6 are more stringent than those relating to tobacco and alcohol.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: There is no information available on deaths recorded in England and Wales solely attributable to taking Vitamin B6 supplements. There is no universally acceptable figure available on the number of alcohol-related deaths because of the difficulty in defining the term alcohol-related.
However, the Health Education Authority made estimates in 1988 and 1995 that in the United Kingdom at least 110,000 and 120,000 people died, respectively, as a result of their smoking. No estimates are available for 1987, 1989 to 1994, 1996 or 1997.
Since there are no figures available for either deaths related to the excessive intake of Vitamin B6 or alcohol-related deaths, it is not possible to make any comparisons.
The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What amount of water would be available:
(a) on general retail sale;
(b) on pharmacy restricted sale; and
(c) on prescription only from a registered medical practitioner,
if a division of the upper safe level above which harmful effects have been noted was made by the same factor as that which was applied by the Committee on Toxicity in establishing the proposed limits for the availability of Vitamin B6 supplements.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment has not had occasion to identify the lowest dose of water at which clinical symptoms of toxicity would occur in humans. Therefore it is not possible to make calculations equivalent to those used in its consideration of Vitamin B6.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |