Anthrax Vaccine (Hansard, 6 October 2003)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Bach)

On 17 September 2003, I wrote to Lord Morris of Manchester and a copy was sent to you and also placed in the Library of the House. The text was as follows: I undertook to write to you in answer to your Parliamentary Question of 4 February(Official Report, Col. WA 26) about the medical countermeasures used to protect our personnel during the 1990–91 Gulf Conflict.

5WA

I am very much aware of the fact that you, other peers, and many outside this House including many Gulf veterans, are very keen for your questions to be answered. 1 am also conscious of the fact that answering them is taking much longer than any of us would like and I can only apologise for the delay. This which [sic] has arisen partly because of the need to seek the advice of an independent Expert Group of the Committee on the Safety of Medicines and the Committee itself. I can assure you that your question has not been overlooked-the Secretary of State for Health, his predecessor, the Minister for Veterans and his predecessor, the Chief Medical Officer as well as myself and numerous officials have been involved at various stages.

Your question comprises several parts. You asked about the anthrax vaccine administered to personnel in 1991. Officials here and at the Department of Health have undertaken a considerable amount of work, the aim being to enable me to provide you with a full answer on the administration of anthrax vaccine offered to UK military personnel from 1990 to the present day. Work is almost complete and I expect to be able to write to you during the first week the House returns following the Conference Recess (ie the week beginning 6 October).

In my letter, I will also deal with your questions about pyriodostigmine bromide (Nerve Agent Pre-treatment sets (NAPS)) tablets and whether any other vaccines administered in 1990–91 had similar limitations (ie that they should be used alone). As you know, Service personnel were offered a range of immunisations to protect against disease. These included standard Service immunisations, immunisations for deployment to areas with specific health hazards, immunisations to help protect personnel against the effects of biological weapons, and immunisations for personnel in specific occupational or "at risk" groups. The information required to enable your questions to be answered was not readily available.

I am copying this letter to Lord Clement-Jones and Lord Williams of Mostyn. It will also be published in the Official Report, and my officials will arrange for a copy to be placed in the Library of the House. The response to the question tabled by Lord Morris will be published in the Official Report as soon as it is available.