| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Hotel Charges (Health Trusts)
14. Mr. Nicholas Winterton: If he will list those health trusts which make available facilities for which patients pay hotel charges; and if he will make a statement. [34382]
Mr. Boateng: All basic services, such as catering, cleaning and laundry, are free of charge to national health service patients. Information is not held centrally on extra services that they may be offered--for example, bedside television.
Mr. Winterton: I am grateful to the Minister for that reply, but does he not feel that the national health service
as a whole should he able to maximise the use of facilities to provide additional resources for patient care? Hospitals are being closed, wings are being decommissioned and beds are going out of commission. There is a growing need for facilities for people who for reasons of their own require a private room and facilities. Would it not be good for the health service if it could offer that facility--without in any way creating a two-tier system, to which I am 100 per cent. opposed?
Mr. Boateng: The hon. Gentleman deserves to be heard with respect, because he has on occasion stood on
his own among Conservative Members in defending the NHS. Nevertheless, he will understand that it is vital that any extra income-generating proposals from trusts must concern optional extras, and they must be just that: optional and extra.
Dr. Iddon: Will my hon. Friend comment on the huge amount of debt owed to the NHS by people in the private sector who have not yet coughed up their full whack?
Mr. Boateng: It is important that anyone who owes anything coughs up.
Anthrax
3.30 pm
Mr. A. J. Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed) (by private notice): To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will make a statement on the threat from, and the precautions Her Majesty's Government are taking against, any possible attempt to bring anthrax into the United Kingdom.
The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Jack Straw): The Government receive a variety of information of the kind that led to today's newspaper reports. As the country knows, Iraq has a clear capability to produce chemical and biological weapons. One purpose, among others, of the United Nations weapons inspectors in Iraq has been to detect any production by Iraq of anthrax.
A number of countries have received intelligence about possible threats by Iraq to smuggle anthrax, but our information is that there is no specific threat to the United Kingdom. There is no evidence to suggest that any attempt has actually been made to smuggle anthrax into this country. There is also no evidence that such an attempt at smuggling might be in prospect.
The House would not expect me to go into detail about the intelligence that we have or the specific counter-measures that we have taken. However, we monitor the terrorist threat to the United Kingdom very closely, and we remain vigilant, taking all the necessary precautions. In doing so, we bear in mind the need both for prudence and for a measured, proportionate response that does not generate unnecessary public alarm.
When the initial information about possible anthrax smuggling was received, it was assessed thoroughly alongside all other relevant information and our assessment of Iraqi intentions. In the light of all that, detailed guidance was subsequently given to operational staff at all our ports on the detection of any such attempted smuggling.
Let me emphasise that this warning was a prudent, precautionary measure, and that we have no reason to believe that such an attempt at smuggling is in prospect. All-ports guidance of this nature is not unusual, and has in the past included information on chemical and biological materials.
Our first aim must be to prevent terrorism, but, if necessary, we have the means to deal swiftly and expertly with its consequences. Our plans are well prepared and continually reviewed. They are tested often and at all levels. Our preparations cover all forms of terrorism, including chemical and biological threats. Those preparations include active co-operation with our allies. As part of our European Union presidency, we organised an expert seminar on biological and chemical terrorism which, coincidentally, is being held in the south of England today.
It is right to take sensible measures, but it is unnecessary to be alarmist. The duty of Government is to ensure that we remain prepared and vigilant. We will continue to fulfil that duty with care.
Mr. Beith:
I thank the Home Secretary for recognising that, once the stories appeared in the press, it was
Does the Home Secretary recognise that we have to be ready to expect anything from a dictator who has already sought to gas the citizens of his own country? That underlines the importance of the stand that Britain took on restarting the weapons inspection system effectively. Is he aware that there is evidence that, during the 1980s, before this Government's time, anthrax was obtained by Iraq from western US sources, and that development of the culture medium and some of the training of Iraqi scientists may have taken place in Britain? Will he consult his right hon. Friends, to whom my hon. and learned Friend the Member for North-East Fife (Mr. Campbell) has put questions on that last point?
Mr. Straw:
The right hon. Gentleman asks me whether I am satisfied that sufficient resources exist to deal with any threat that may arise. Yes, I am. They include, necessarily, not only resources at ports but resources effectively to assess the intelligence and other information that is received and the overall assessment of the threat that is posed at any stage by Iraq. Of course I pay tribute, as the right hon. Gentleman has done, to those on whom Britain relies for a variety of information.
The right hon. Gentleman asked me a specific question related to things that may or may not have happened in the 1980s. He will understand that I have no personal knowledge of those things, but I shall certainly refer the matter to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow):
As this matter was raised last month by me and others, may I ask on what date the perceived threat first became apparent to the Home Office?
Mr. Straw:
The specific information to which reference is made in today's edition of The Sun became available on 6 March, but I should emphasise to my hon. Friend that that is part of a series of information that is available. The information has to be assessed within its context, not out of context.
Sir Brian Mawhinney (North-West Cambridgeshire):
Does the Home Secretary accept that it is our considered view that, while we demand maximum vigilance at our national points of entry, we should not give Saddam any satisfaction by allowing anyone to generate indefensible public anxiety in this country? While I do not wish him to reveal the contents of the intelligence that he has received, will he assure the House that it has no special features that would constitute a particular threat to this country and/or something about which our public should be told?
Mr. Straw:
I most warmly thank the right hon. Gentleman for the tenor of his remarks. He is entirely right to say that we have to balance our response carefully and take sensible and prudent measures without, as he says, giving Saddam the comfort of raising indefensible public anxieties that are not necessary. As I have already
Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North):
While we do not want panic or undue anxiety, should not the British people learn the useful lesson that the present Iraqi regime is capable of any evil, bearing in mind what has already been said about the gassing in March 1988 in Iraq itself? Does not all this demonstrate that, as the regime continues to have such means of mass destruction, the United Nations weapons inspection needs to continue for a very long time to come?
Mr. Straw:
My hon. Friend has been robust in support of the allied effort against Saddam Hussein--rightly, in my view. The answer to both his questions about the evil nature of the Iraqi regime and the continuing need for weapons inspections is yes.
Mr. Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham):
Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that there has always been a risk that terrorists, whether state-driven or domestic, would resort to biological and chemical weapons? Does he accept that that is a fact that has to be taken into account when determining the proper degree of control at external frontiers, and that we should try to ensure that, when people dismantle external frontiers, they leave in place systems that are capable of identifying the import of such weapons? Does he also agree that it is important that nations that are committed to fighting terrorism should ensure that they exchange information as rapidly as possible when they identify any risk of this sort?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |