8 Sept 2003 : Column 1W
Dr. Tonge: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what reports he has received on the performance of Clansman radio systems in Iraq. [124671]
Mr. Ingram: The Information and Communications System Support IPT has requested formal and specific feedback on the performance of Clansman during Operation Telic. A positive report was received on 18 August 2003 from Headquarters Land Command on the performance of Clansman radio systems during Operation TELIC in Iraq, which stated that Clansman "performed well in availability terms". No formal reports have yet been received on the performance of Clansman in terms of its effectiveness as a Combat Net Radio System. Additionally, no formal complaints have been received in respect of Clansman performance.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much money was paid for (a) private and (b) NHS medical treatment of service personnel in each calendar year since 1997. [117883]
Mr. Caplin [holding answer 9 June 2003]: The information requested is only held by financial year. The cost of private treatment in respect of centrally run treatment initiatives and single service schemes in the United Kingdom in each of the years from 2001–02 to 2002–03 is shown as follows. No figures for private treatment have been recorded centrally for years prior to 2000–01.
| £ million | |
|---|---|
| 2000–01 | 0.769 |
| 2001–02 | 4.095 |
| 2002–03 | 3.326 |
Expenditure on NHS providers between 1996–97 and 2002–03 was as follows:
| £ million | |
|---|---|
| 1996–97 | 0.137 |
| 1997–98 | 2.294 |
| 1998–99 | 7.419 |
| 1999–2000 | 8.560 |
| 2000–01 | 15.168 |
| 2001–02 | 23.209 |
| 2002–03 | 25.725 |
The figures represent payments under the Service Level Agreements between the Ministry of Defence and
8 Sept 2003 : Column 2W
the NHS Hospital Trusts which host the MOD Hospital Units (MDHUs) as they became established, the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine (RCDM) from 2001–02 onwards, and the Royal Surrey County Hospital from 2000–01 onwards (for oromaxillofacial treatment only).
The figures for 1996–97 to 2000–01 represent the net costs to MOD after offsetting the payments received from the host Trusts in respect of military personnel serving in MDHU's, the RCDM and the Royal Surrey County Hospital. With effect from 1 April 2001, the two sets of costs were separated and figures shown for that year onwards represent gross treatment costs.
Mr. McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many trainees have been (a) killed and (b) injured in the last 10 years; and in each case what the type of training being undertaken and the cause of injury or death was. [123950]
Mr. Caplin: Between 1 January 1993 and 31 December 2002 there were 112 Regular Service trainees killed through fatal injuries. It is not possible to provide individual details for each trainee as this would compromise service personnel confidentiality. Comprehensive information on non-fatal injuries is not held centrally, and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. The following table provides details of the deaths of the trainees killed as a result of injuries, broken down by cause.
| Cause of death | Number killed |
|---|---|
| Training and Exercises-Accidents | 10 |
| Firearms | 3 |
| Environmental factors (e.g. Excessive heat/cold pressure) | 3 |
| Road traffic accidents | 1 |
| Drowning | 1 |
| Falls, twisting, turning, slipping etc. | 2 |
| On-Duty Accidents | 10 |
| Road traffic accidents | 5 |
| Firearms(1) | 2 |
| Aircraft | 2 |
| Parachute | 1 |
| Off-Duty Accidents | 68 |
| Road traffic accidents | 46 |
| Poisoning | 6 |
| Hanging, suffocation, strangulation etc. | 5 |
| Falls, twisting, turning, slipping etc. | 4 |
| Firearms(1) | 2 |
| Drowning | 2 |
| Aircraft | 1 |
| Machinery and tools | 1 |
| Water transport | 1 |
| Suicide(2) | 23 |
| Off duty criminal shooting | 1 |
| Total killed | 112 |
(1) Includes deaths awaiting coroner's verdicts.
(2) Defined as coroner's verdicts of suicide and open. Please note that suicide and open verdicts are subject to change as outstanding coroner's verdicts are reported.
8 Sept 2003 : Column 3W
Mr. Tyrie: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on how many occasions between 31 March 2002 and 31 March 2003 (a) departmental and (b) non-departmental special advisers have travelled abroad in an official capacity; what places were visited; and how much each visit cost. [126670]
Mr. Caplin: Between 1 April 2002 and 31 March 2003, special advisers in the Ministry of Defence travelled abroad on 12 occasions and visited the following countries:
Belgium
Crete
Czech Republic
France
Germany
Italy
Kuwait
Poland
Qatar
Turkey
USA
All travel by special advisers is undertaken fully in accordance with the guidelines set out in the Ministerial Code and the Civil Service Management Code.
Mr. Paul Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many children suffered adverse effects last year from prescribed drugs that required hospital treatment. [126718]
Dr. Ladyman: Data from Hospital Episode Statistics indicates that there were 2,778 admissions to hospital of children under 16 years due to adverse effects from drugs, medicines and biological substances in therapeutic use in national health service hospitals in England in 2001–02. These data include adverse effects from all medicines, whether prescribed or taken without prescription. It is important to note that these figures do not represent the number of patients, as a person may have been admitted to hospital more than once in the year.
Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions his Department has had with strategic health authorities and primary care trusts to ensure cancer is treated as a primary care priority in line with his Department's national guidance; and what steps his Department is taking to ensure cancer is treated as a primary care priority in line with his Department's national guidance. [123255]
Miss Melanie Johnson: The NHS Cancedr Plan made clear the crucial role that family doctors and community nurses have to play at all stages along the cancer patient
8 Sept 2003 : Column 4W
pathway. One of the actions in the NHS Cancer Plan was the establishment of a new partnership between the National Health Service and Macmillan Cancer Relief to provide around £3 million a year for three years to support a lead clinician in cancer within every primary care trust (PCT). These leads have a key role to play by providing strategic leadership within the PCT, contributing to the development of cancer networks, improving communication between sectors, raising standards of cancer care through the PCTs and ensuring services are responsive to the needs of people affected by cancer.
A recent workshop to develop a vision for primary care cancer services examined the role of community-based services in all aspects of cancer care including patients at risk of cancer, patients with symptoms suggesting a possible diagnosis of cancer and the care of patients with known cancer. The workshop was attended by a number of stakeholders including representatives from PCTs. It also provided an opportunity to consider the cancer elements of the proposed general medical services contract quality and outcomes framework. This includes some cancer and palliative care specific indicators as well as other generic organisational indicators that are of particular relevance to cancer patients wuch as sharing information out of hours.
Responsibility for commissioning of cancer services now rests with PCTs and it is for PCTs in parnership with strategic health authorities (SHAs) and other local stakeholders to determine how best to meet national priorities, including the targets set for cancer, in "Improvement, Expansion and Reform: the next three years—Priorities and Planning Framework 2003 to 2006".
PCTs and SHAs were required to produce local delivery plans (LDPs) for the three years 2003–04 to 2005–06 setting out how the would deliver the national targets set out in the Priorities and Planning Framework and supporting guidance was provided to assist with this. It is the SHA who are responsible for delivering the targets or outcomes in their LDP.
Mr. Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the latest average waiting time is from referral to (a) imaging treatment, (b) endoscopy treatment and (c) radiotherapy treatment for NHS cancer patients. [126990]
Miss Melanie Johnson: Data are not collected centrally on waiting times for scans, endoscopy or radiotherapy treatment. The length of time that a patient may have to wait is dependent on their clinical condition. Emergency cases need to be seen immediately. Other cases will be carried out as quickly as possible, dependent on the clinical priority of all patients waiting to be treated.
Where these procedures form part of the pathway for cancer patients the NHS Cancer Plan set out maximum waiting time targets for first definitive cancer treatment. From 2001, there was a one month maximum wait from diagnosis to first treatment for breast cancer and a one month wait from urgent referral to first treatment for
8 Sept 2003 : Column 5W
children's cancers, testicular cancer and acute leukaemia. From 2002, there was a maximum two month wait from urgent referral to treatment for breast cancer. By 2005, there will be a maximum one month wait from diagnosis to first treatment and a maximum two months from urgent referral to first treatment for all cancers. Performance data on current cancer waiting times targets are published on the Departments website at www.doh.gov.uk/cancerwaits.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |