§ 9. Mr. Yeoasked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he plans to respond to the third report of the Social Services Committee on problems associated with AIDS, HC 182, Session 1986–87.
§ Mr. YeoDoes my right hon. Friend agree that a programme of anonymised screening represents by far the simplest way of obtaining accurate information about the spread of AIDS through the population? Does he further agree that without that information it is impossible to evaluate the efforts that the Government are making to combat the spread of this appalling disease? Does he agree that such a programme could be introduced at a low cost because blood samples are already routinely collected from large numbers of people?
§ Mr. MooreWhat I can agree with is that we need better information about the spread of the HIV infection. I know that my hon. Friend served honourably on the Select Committee in the previous Parliament and that the Committee did not share his view on anonymised screening. Having said that, I am, of course, anxious to ensure that we have the best scientific advice, and I am considering the issue. I hope that my hon. Friend will share my desire for better information, not necessarily gained from the route that he seeks to pursue.
§ Mr. Frank FieldFollowing the Committee's report, have the Government been able to respond positively to the capital needs of London Lighthouse, and if so to what extent?
§ Mr. MooreI know of that particular issue, and my hon. Friend the Minister for Health is actively considering it at the moment. I hope that he will be able to make a statement, which I hope will be helpful, in the not too distant future.
§ Sir David PriceMay I confirm to my right hon. Friend that my hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, South (Mr. Yeo) was in a minority of one in proposing anonymised screening? All other members of the Select Committee felt that it would be entirely irresponsible clinically. However, if a person is found to have a blood sample which is HIV positive, it must be right to do something about that patient.
§ Mr. MooreI appreciate my hon. Friend's comments. As he and hon. Members on both sides of the House will know, my predecessor welcomed unreservedly the advice of the Committee and the help that it gave in this difficult area.
§ Mr. Robin CookDoes the Secretary of State accept the estimate of the Select Committee that 1,200 haemophiliacs are antibody positive as a result of infection at the hands of the NHS? Does he recognise that the Government must bear part of the responsibility for that number because of the failure to make Britain self-sufficient in blood products, which has left us dependent on imports from commercial sources in the United States? Does he agree with the robust statement of the Under-Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Derbyshire, South (Mrs. Currie), that anyone who denies that AIDS can be transmitted by blood products needs his head examined? Therefore, does he accept that, whatever the legal liability, the Government have a moral obligation to help those haemophiliacs and to protect their dependants against mortgage defaults and homelessness?
§ Mr. MooreI can confirm the figures that the hon. Gentleman gave with regard to the 1,200 haemophiliacs. I have received letters from my hon. Friends on this issue. Some of their constituents have suffered from this, and I share their deep sympathy, but the House will be aware that there has never been a general state scheme to compensate those who suffer the unavoidable adverse effects that arise from medical procedures. The Government have tried to provide all NHS facilities to those who suffer illness as a result of the infection. So far we have provided £104,000 to each of the six haemophilia reference centres in England so that they can provide a counselling service. In addition, the DHSS is working closely with the Haemophilia Society. Beyond that, I can say that I will meet representatives of the Haemophilia Society next week.