| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Warner: My Lords, I entirely agree with my noble friend's concerns about the laboratory in question and the uncritical acceptance of its results by parts of the media. The main source of the misleading information in the media is Chemsol, which is run by a person who is not qualified in microbiology, is not a member of a recognised professional body and whose so-called laboratory does not meet UK accreditation standards. The methods used in this laboratory do not distinguish between harmless bacteria found on the skin and the potentially harmful MRSA.
Baroness O'Cathain: My Lords, if the laboratory does not reach accreditation standards, why do the Government not close it down?
Lord Warner: Wait for it, my Lords; there is quite a good answer.
Dr Malyszewicz, the owner and operator of this so-called laboratory—and I am using the term advisedly—is not a member of a recognised professional body as a microbiologist. Nor is he a registered healthcare scientist or medical doctor. His laboratory is not accredited as a diagnostic laboratory. In those circumstances, he is not actually claiming to be any of the things for which we could take professional action against him.
Lord Rooker: My Lords, it is the Liberal Democrats' turn.
Baroness Neuberger: My Lords, given what the Minister has said, what else could be done to indicate to the public and the media more widely the concerns
30 Nov 2005 : Column 211
that we obviously share around the House about people passing themselves off as experts in microbiology when they are not?
Lord Warner: My Lords, I would certainly commend to the House the work done by the BBC in its program "You and Yours" on Radio 4 on 14 November, which exposed the circumstances involved. We sent down our inspector of microbiology as long ago as July 2004 to inspect these facilities, which were described as a "garden shed" on the Radio 4 programme I mentioned. We have written to the media to explain the circumstances and given them copies of the inspector of microbiology's report. We expect some parts of the media to behave with a little more responsibility when we have given them this information.
Lord Soley: My Lords, is that not the core of the problem? The MRSA scandal is not the first example of a media scare, with people being genuinely worried and scared by a story that had virtually no substance to it. There have been many other examples of science being misreported in this way. It is not for this House or even the Minister but perhaps for the scientific bodies and, inadequate as it is, the Press Complaints Commission to start looking at how hopes are raised unrealistically and fears are raised unreasonably by press stories that show no scientific understanding. That also undermines public confidence in scientific thought and method.
Lord Warner: My Lords, I agree entirely with my noble friend's remarks. We all accept that there are some serious issues around MRSA in this country, as there are throughout the whole of Europe, that have to be tackled; but they have to be tackled responsibly and not irresponsibly as has been the case in this area.
Baroness Masham of Ilton: My Lords—
Lord Rooker: My Lords, it is the turn of the Cross Benches.
Baroness Masham of Ilton: My Lords, would it not be a good idea to make MRSA a notifiable condition so that a qualified person would sign the form?
Lord Warner: My Lords, consideration has been given to that although it is not the situation at the moment. However, we are the first government to introduce a mandatory surveillance reporting scheme on all healthcare-associated infections. We publish the results on MRSA as part of that. The scheme is being conducted by the Health Protection Agency.
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, I understand that the laboratory which has been so rightly criticised by your Lordships today is not the only one involved in this
30 Nov 2005 : Column 212
report. The Minister talked about "validation". I assume that he meant validation not of laboratories but of tests. In the days of the Public Health Laboratory Service, difficult tests were almost invariably checked in other labs within the service. What is the position now?
Lord Warner: My Lords, there is an arrangement for accreditation, and I can send noble Lords the full particulars. As I said in my Answer, they are based on quality assurance, quality controls and participation in an external quality assurance scheme. So people are not just self-regulating. They are applying in a similar way to that which the noble Lord mentioned.
Baroness Tonge: My Lords, has the Minister read Florence Nightingale's Notes on Nursing, which was written in 1860 before bacteria were even discovered? It contains an excellent blueprint for hospital hygiene and good nursing care. I wonder whether he would undertake to send it to all hospital managers for Christmas this year.
Lord Warner: My Lords, I certainly would not want healthcare managers to be diverted from their current tasks in managing the NHS and achieving financial balance. However, I shall undertake to read the book if the noble Baroness will undertake to make a full study of all the measures that the Government have taken to improve hand hygiene and tackle MRSA.
Baroness Sharples asked Her Majesty's Government:
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, information on public bodies sponsored by central government is provided annually in the Cabinet Office publication Public Bodies, which records information as at 31 March each year. In 1997, the Cabinet Office recorded that there were 1,128 public bodies reporting to UK government departments and what are now the devolved administrations. As at 31 March this year there were 910 public bodies reporting to UK government departments, not including bodies reporting to the devolved administrations.
Baroness Sharples: My Lords, I find that Answer very interesting. Would the Minister not agree that independent reports show that there are over 100 more quangos now than there were in 1997 and that more than 100 quangocrats—it is an awful word—are earning in excess of £100,000 a year? Mr Blair said in 1996 that he would consign quangos to "history's dustbin", but since then there have been a great many
30 Nov 2005 : Column 213
more. Is it not perhaps time that Mr Blair had a new buzzword—"relocation, relocation, relocation"—because I have counted 250 quangos based in London?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I have provided figures which suggest that we have continued the long process of merging and reducing the number of non-departmental public bodies. Indeed, we are actively pursuing and continuing that policy as I speak with the merger of regulatory bodies which are down from 31 to 11. In the agricultural field we are considering reducing the number of levy boards and so on. So this is an active area of government policy. Like the noble Baroness, we are concerned to ensure that we do not develop public bodies which are not necessary and are not accountable.
Lord Borrie: My Lords, does my noble friend the Minister deprecate the assumption behind this Question that quangos are necessarily less efficient, less flexible and less useful in organising public affairs than more traditional bodies such as government departments and local authorities?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I am not surprised that my noble friend makes that important point. Naturally, I share his view very much. I think that non-departmental public bodies—to give them the more accurate description—are very effective in their delivery of services and the way in which they regulate. They are, of course, fully accountable for the funding they receive. Inevitably all governments turn to non-departmental public bodies to provide a whole range of services that are not necessarily best provided directly through government departments.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |