§ Mr. Dobsonasked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many limbs were fitted at artificial limb and appliance centres in each month since January 1985.
§ Mr. Major[pursuant to his reply, 21 January 1987]: The information requested is not available centrally. However, the number of patient attendances for "fittings" in each four-week period since January 1985 is shown in the table.
820W
Fittings at all Artificial Limb and Appliances Centres by all Contractors January 1985–December 1986 Four Week Period Number of Patient Attendances for Fittings 1 February 1985 2,824 1 March 1985 2,857 28 March 1985 2,732 25 April 1985 2,231 24 May 1985 2,717 21 June 1985 2,674 19 July 1985 2,912 16 August 1985 2,626 13 September 1985 2,557 11 October 1985 2,758 8 November 1985 2,995 6 December 1985 2,857 3 January 1986 1,950 31 January 1986 2,716 28 February 1986 2,807 28 March 1986 2,838 25 April 1986 2,617 23 May 1986 2,547 20 June 1986 2,567
Four Week Period Number of Patient Attendances for Fittings 18 July 1986 2,955 15 August 1986 2,848 12 September 1986 2,655 10 October 1986 2,787 7 November 1986 2,508 5 December 1986 2,532 2 January 1987 1,805
§ Mr. Dobsonasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish in the Official Report the progress made towards implementing each of the recommendations of the McColl report.
§ Mr. Major[pursuant to his reply, 21 January 1987]: We have reported progress on developing and improving the Artificial Limb and Appliance Centre services since the McColl report was published, and shall continue to do so. We are still considering some of the major issues raised in the report, and we will announce decisions as soon as possible.
§ Mr. Dobsonasked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many prosthetist appointments at artificial limb and appliance centres have been postponed due to the failure to supply limbs in time because of the Hanger's dispute.
§ Mr. Major[pursuant to his reply, 21 January 1987]: Since the J.E. Hanger industrial dispute began on 16 September 1986, 1ll prosthetist appointments have had to be postponed as a result of the failure of the company to supply repaired or new prostheses in time.
821W
§ Mr. Dobsonasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will list the organisations and individuals whose reaction to the McColl report has been obtained during the consultation period; and what are the main conclusions he draws from that consultation.
§ Mr. Major[pursuant to his reply, 21 January 1987]: I refer the hon. Member to my reply to the right hon. Member for Stoke on Trent, South (Mr. Ashley) on 12 January 1987, at columns 109–110.
Additionally, in commenting on the artificial limb service, patients' and professional interests have generally welcomed the report's conclusions, but the artificial limb industry has argued that it paints too bleak a picture. I gave a detailed account of the position on the artificial limb service during the debate in the House on 26 November, at columns 330–32. Most of those commenting on the wheelchair service have supported the introduction of a powered indoor-outdoor chair, but do not agree that this should be funded by abatement of mobility allowance. We are still considering this major issue in the context of decisions on other important aspects of the ALAC services raised by the McColl report.
§ Mr. Dobsonasked the Secretary of State for Social Services when the McColl review of artificial limb and appliance centre services was completed; when he first received the report; and why the report was not published until 27 January 1986.
§ Mr. Major[pursuant to his reply, 21 January 1987]: The review of Artificial Limb and Appliance Centre services was completed in autumn 1985, and the working party's report was received on 14 October of that year. However, following its submission, Professor McColl and his colleagues decided to make a number of amendments which had to be incorporated before publication. Their final revisions were submitted on 8 January 1986. None affected a point of substance or any of the working party's conclusions or recommendations.