| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
National Blood Service
Lord Graham of Edmonton asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What progress has been made towards the modernisation of the National Blood Service.[HL2265]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Hayman): The National Blood Service is a vital part of the National Health Service and, as such, is expected to provide high quality, cost efficient services. Over the past year, following the report we commissioned from Professor Cash on the Liverpool Blood Centre, the NBS has been working to improve the quality of the services it provides to blood donors, clinicians and patients. But to achieve lasting improvement it also needs to modernise the management of the service, both nationally and locally, and to develop a clear strategic direction within which all parts of the service can operate. We have therefore approved proposals submitted by the National Blood Authority to effect these changes and to ensure a first-class future for the National Blood Service.
The existing three-zone structure into which the National Blood Service is currently organised will be replaced by a single integrated structure. This will improve the performance of the service by creating a greater sense of strategic direction, shared ownership of priorities with the wider NHS and clearer accountabilities. In addition, local services will be enhanced by the appointment of a blood centre head who will lead local service delivery to hospitals and patients.
Copies of the National Blood Authority's plans have been placed in the Library.
Human Cloning
Lord Alton of Liverpool asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What response they are making to President Chirac's criticism of those countries that have not signed the Council of Europe protocol banning human cloning which thereby may continue to provide a safe haven for scientists seeking to evade international prohibitions on human cloning.[HL2160]
Baroness Hayman: The Government fully recognise the importance of international action to secure the prohibition of human reproductive cloning. Currently, 24 out of the 40 Council of Europe Members have signed the Cloning Protocol to the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. The United Kingdom was fully involved in the development of the protocol and fully supports the principle it enshrines.
However, a member state of the Council of Europe can only sign a protocol if it has previously signed the relevant convention. The United Kingdom has not at this time signed the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. This is because the Government have been consulting on provisions in the convention, although these are entirely unrelated to cloning.
In addition, the Government have fully supported the Universal Declaration of the Human Genome and Human Rights which prohibits the reproductive cloning of human beings and which was agreed unanimously by the member states of Unesco in November 1997.
NHS: Public Interest
Lord Harris of Haringey asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What is their attitude to the Commission on Representing the Public Interest in the National Health Service established by the Association of Community Health Councils for England and Wales; and whether the Government will be submitting evidence to the commission.[HL2239]
Baroness Hayman: We are aware of the commission recently set up by the Association of Community Health Councils for England and Wales (ACHCEW). We do not intend to submit evidence to the commission but we will be interested to consider and discuss the outcomes of its report with ACHCEW in due course.
Osteoporosis Strategies
The Earl of Munster asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Hayman on 26 January (WA 143-44), what specific measures are being taken to ascertain that the new Osteoporosis Guidelines for General Practitioners, developed under the auspices of the National Osteoporosis Society and the Royal College of Physicians, will be implemented at the national and local level.[HL2190]
Baroness Hayman: The Royal College of Physicians' clinical guidelines for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis and the desktop guide for general practitioners and primary care teams are guidance. They offer advice on effectiveness to inform clinical decisions.
It is not possible to enforce guidelines or to tell clinicians what treatments they can or cannot provide. That does not mean, however, that we expect clinicians to ignore best practice where it is available.
The Department of Health highly recommends both documents as a basis for developing local osteoporosis strategies and where strategies already exist would expect them to be consistent with this guidance.
The noble Earl will be aware from our previous answer of the work undertaken to publicise these documents in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Asbestos Fibre Dust: Chrysotile
Lord Avebury asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What research they have conducted or commissioned to establish whether asbestos fibre dust can be produced by cutting, sawing or otherwise shaping blocks in which chrysotile is encapsulated in a matrix of either cement or resin; and whether they are satisfied that workers engaged in these operations are fully protected from the risk of contracting mesothelioma; and[HL2183]
What research they have conducted or commissioned to ensure that products manufactured from blocks of chrysotile fibre encapsulated in a matrix of either cement or resin to not generate airborne chrysotile fibre under any possible conditions of use.[HL2184]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Lord Whitty): It is firmly established that cutting, sawing or similar work that disturbs asbestos cement or resins can give rise to significant release of asbestos fibres.
The health of workers is protected by health and safety law that requires employers to avoid work with asbestos. Where this is unavoidable, employers must do all that they can to reduce workers' exposure to the lowest possible level.
Museums and Galleries: Trustee Governance
The Earl of Carlisle asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they will clarify the nature and benefits of trustee governance of national museums and galleries.[HL2090]
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The trustees of the national museums and galleries hold their collections in trust for the nation and are responsible for caring for those collections and ensuring public access. They operate at arm's length from government, so that the trustees may perform their statutory functions with freedom from day-to-day government intervention. At the same time, the trustees are subject to certain controls to ensure that the public funds they receive are properly spent on the purposes for which they are voted by Parliament. Under these arrangements the national museums and galleries benefit from the contribution of experienced and distinguished individuals who give their valuable time to determine the strategy and
direction of those institutions, within the context of government policy.Broadcasting Act 1996: MED TV
Lord Avebury asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether, in view of the refusal by the Independent Television Commission to allow witnesses called by MED TV in proceedings held to decide whether MED TV's licence should be revoked under Section 89 of the Broadcasting Act 1996 on Friday 8 April, they will seek to amend Section 89 so as to require the ITC to hear any witnesses brought by the appellants to show why it is not necessary in the public interest to revoke the licence; and [HL1945]
Whether they will amend Section 89 of the Broadcasting Act 1996 so as to provide that any hearing at which a licence-holder makes representations to the Independent Television Commission under Section 89(2)(b) takes place in public; and[HL1946]
Whether they will seek to amend Section 89 of the Broadcasting Act 1996 so as to provide that in considering, under subsection (3), whether it is necessary in the public interest to revoke the licence in question, the Independent Television Commission should have regard to (a) the likelihood of crimes being committed or disorders arising as a result of the programmes mentioned in subsection (1)(a) of that section; (b) the availability of other broadcasts in the languages of the programmes mentioned in subsection (1)(a) of that section; and (c) the availability of other broadcasts from a similar ideological or cultural perspective to that holder of the licence.[HL2002]
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Government have no plans to amend Section 89 of the Broadcasting Act 1996. It is for the ITC to determine how it deals with representations about matters to do with the revocation of a licence. I understand that the ITC heard and considered representations from MED TV before reaching a decision and had advised MED TV in advance what representations would be allowed under its procedures. The ITC announced its decision on 23 April to revoke the broadcaster's licence.
| Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |