HC Deb 20 March 1961 vol 637 cc11-3
13. Mr. N. Pannell

asked the Minister of Health what facilities exist in the United Kingdom for the care of people suffering from leprosy; and what was the cost of providing such facilities in the latest financial year for which figures are available.

17. Commander Kerans

asked the Minister of Health how many institutions there are in the United Kingdom within the National Health Service, and without, which treat cases of leprosy.

Miss Pitt

In England and Wales there are two special units for in-patient treatment, one of which is outside the National Health Service. Some patients are also treated at other hospitals. In Scotland I am informed that patients are treated at the major hospitals for infectious diseases or at the tropical diseases unit of the Eastern General Hospital, Edinburgh. The cost cannot be separately estimated.

Mr. Pannell

Does my hon. Friend mean that it is not possible to ascertain the cost of these special facilities provided for a certain class of patient in certain institutions?

Miss Pitt

No, it is not possible, because where they are treated in general hospitals all the costs would be taken together. I can, however, help my hon. Friend by telling him that in 1959–60 the cost of the Jordan Hospital—that is the one within the National Health Service—was £19,109 14s. 1d. The overall figure for the Homes of St. Giles, a private undertaking, and the figures for treatment at other hospitals in England and Wales cannot be given.

14. Mr. N. Pannell

asked the Minister of Health what factors were responsible for a reduction in the number of people stated to be suffering from leprosy in 1959 from a figure of 312, as given in answer to a Question from the hon. Member for Liverpool, Kirkdale, on 16th May, 1960, to the present revised figure for 1959 of 212.

Miss Pitt

The deletion of persons no longer requiring treatment or surveillance or known to have died or to have left the country.

Mr. Pannell

Is my hon. Friend aware that I have been asking Questions on this subject for several years and that the replies given in the House by her Ministry indicated that there were 46 cases in 1951, rising steadily every year to 312 in 1959? Am I now to understand that my hon. Friend's Ministry has such little regard for accuracy that all the figures that have been given me in this matter are incorrect?

Miss Pitt

No, Sir. Figures have been kept separately only since 1951. The review was started in June, 1960, because the passage of time in relation to notifications since 1951 and the growing total itself indicated the need for us to review the figures.

Mr. Pannell

Does this mean that there was no revision or check of the figures until 1960 and that, therefore, all the previous figures that were given to me, which indicated much higher numbers than those now suggested by my hon. Friend, were inaccurate?

Miss Pitt

They were as accurate as the information available at the time. They are collected centrally at my Ministry, and if people move from one place to another, as happens, we may lose track of them. Deaths are not always notified promptly. The review was to ensure that the figures which we have are accurate.