The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Author: admin

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Industrial Diseases – 30 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Industrial Diseases on 30th October 1986.

    Mr. Kirkwood Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when the Government were last advised on the prescription of industrial diseases by the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major We last received advice from the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council earlier this year when it submitted its report on occupational lung cancer. Arrangements are being made to publish this report before the end of the year.

    Mr. McTaggart Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will publish a table showing the number and percentage of households and persons in Scotland below, at, or up to 40 per cent. above supplementary benefit level in 1979, 1981 and 1983.

    Mr. Major [pursuant to his reply, 6 May 1986, c. 73]: Estimates are provided in the tables. All of these estimates are subject to sampling error, but the Scottish estimates of low income assessment units that are not receiving supplementary benefit are particularly prone to this statistical problem. This is because of the small number of sample cases available in the Family Expenditure Survey.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Supplementary Benefit – 30 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Supplementary Benefit on 30th October 1986.

    Mr. Clay Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people were living in families below supplementary benefit level, on supplementary benefit, with incomes up to 140 per cent. of supplementary benefit, classified by both employment status and family type in 1983 on the latest basis and on a basis comparable with 1981 and 1979; and, in each case, what proportion of the total population in each category they represent.

    Mr. Major I shall let the hon. Member have a reply as soon as possible.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the McColl Report – 29 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the McColl Report on 29th October 1986.

    Mr. Alfred Morris Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what action has so far been taken in regard to the recommendations of the McColl report; when he will be taking any further action; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major On publication of the McColl report in January, we asked the National Health Service management board to oversee the programme of action to develop the artificial limb and appliance centre services, and for advice on some of the major issues raised in the report. We also invited interested organisations and individuals to comment. To ensure that action was carried forward quickly, we appointed as an interim measure a general manager to head the Department’s new disablement services division.

    Under the direction of the National Health Service management board and the general manager, a programme of action to improve standards of service where possible immediately is being vigorously pursued. For example, initiatives are being taken to improve transport and appointment arrangements; to ensure the availability of the full range of limb systems at each centre and to reduce delivery times; to introduce more attractive, coloured wheelchairs and a new basic wheelchair for occasional use; to improve management information and financial control systems, including the wider installation of computers; and to develop closer links with other related services for disabled people.

    We have not yet completed our consideration of future organisational arrangements and certain other policy issues raised by the McColl report. I shall inform the House as soon as conclusions are reached.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Disabled Persons – 29 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Disabled Persons on 29th October 1986.

    Mr. Alfred Morris Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received from the chairman of the social services committee of the Association of Metropolitan Authorities concerning his observations on the Disabled Persons (Services, Consultation and Representation) Act at the Cardiff social services conference; what reply he is sending; if he will be meeting the association to discuss the Act’s implementation; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major The chairman of the social services committee of the Association of Metropolitan Authorities wrote to my right hon. Friend on 9 October, and I hope to reply shortly.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Retirement – 28 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Retirement on 28th October 1986.

    Mr. Meacher Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is the estimated cost in a full year of implementing a retirement age of 60 years for men (a) gross of benefit savings and (b) net of benefit savings.

    Mr. Major Reliable estimates of the costs of reducing men’s pension age are extremely difficult because they are highly sensitive to what assumptions are made about how change would affect retirement behaviour and labour market behaviour. At present, our best estimate is that a reduction in men’s pension age to 60 would involve a gross cost approaching £5,000 million in a full year. The estimated net cost is about £3,000 million.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the Social Security Advisory Committee – 27 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the Social Security Advisory Committee on 27th October 1986.

    Mrs. Beckett Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what organisations are regularly consulted by the Social Security Advisory Committee, the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council and the Occupational Pensions Board, respectively.

    Mr. Major When regulations are referred to the Social Security Advisory Committee, the committee generally initiates a consultation exercise in which all interested parties are invited to apply for copies of the consultation document and to submit representations. I understand that the committee maintains several lists of organisations with an interest in social security matters; a main list and six secondary lists grouped under subject headings. For each consultation exercise, organisations are selected from the secondary lists according to the subject of the regulations and a copy of the consultation document is sent to these selected organisations and to all those on the main list. All the lists are regularly updated and I have placed a copy of the current version in the Library, together with lists of the organisations regularly consulted by the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council and the Occupational Pensions Board.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Supplementary Benefit – 27 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Supplementary Benefit on 27th October 1986.

    Mr. Frank Field Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will estimate the number of pensioners who would now qualify for supplementary benefits if it were not for the payment of occupational pensions.

    Mr. Major The best estimate which we can give, based on information from the family expenditure survey, is that in 1984 some 1.1 million pensioners would have qualified for supplementary pension if they had not been in receipt of an occupational pension.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Training Programmes – 23 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Training Programmes on 23rd October 1986.

    Mr. Ron Davies Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if attendance on or completion of a course relating to the Government’s restart programme or the proposed six-month training programme for the long-term unemployed under 25 years will affect entitlement to supplementary benefit; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major I shall let the hon. Member have a reply as soon as possible.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Psychiatric Beds – 23 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Psychiatric Beds on 23rd October 1986.

    Mr. Ashley Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many psychiatric in-patient beds there are in Britain per 100,000 people; and what are the corresponding figures for psychiatric beds, where there are staff able to communicate, per 100,000 pre-lingually deaf people.

    Mr. Major In 1985, the latest year for which figures are available centrally, the average daily number of available beds in mental illness specialities per 100,000 population in England was 161. Information for the rest of Great Britain is a matter for the my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Scotland and Wales. Information is not held centrally on the corresponding figures for psychiatric beds where the staff are able to communicate with pre-lingually deaf patients.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Deaf People – 23 October 1986

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Deaf People on 23rd October 1986.

    Mr. Ashley Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many pre-lingual deaf people there are in Britain.

    Mr. Major I regret that statistics are not collected in this form and the registers kept by local authorities in England are not truly representative. However, it appears to be generally estimated that the prevalence of pre-lingual deafness is around one per thousand of live births.

    Mr. Ashley Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many health service units provide specifically for the mental health of profoundly deaf people; where they are located; what is their size in terms of both professional staff and patients treated; what provision there is in regions which do not have such a unit; and how much supra-regional funding is provided.

    Mr. Major Two units within the National Health Service are known to provide specialist psychiatric services for people who are deaf. These are located at the Springfield hospital, in Wandsworth, and at the Whittingham hospital in Preston. The numbers of patients treated in 1985–86 were:

    Hospital | In-patient/discharges and Deaths | Out-patient Attendances
    Springfield Hospital | 27 | 187
    Whittingham Hospital | 56 | 183

    Information is not held centrally on the numbers of staff appointed directly to these units.

    In addition, building is scheduled to start on a major new psychiatric unit at the Queen Elizabeth hospital, Birmingham, early in 1990. The unit will include specialist facilities for patients throughout the West Midlands region with particular needs, including deaf people with psychiatric disorders. The building is scheduled for completion in 1993.

    Supra-regional funds are not at present provided for this service, though North Western and South West Thames regional health authorities have recently applied for their services to be supra-regionally designated. These applications are currently under consideration by the Supra Regional Services Advisory Group.

    The principle of supra-regional services is to make available a highly-specialised facility to patients from regions which do not contain such a facility themselves.

    Mr. Ashley Asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is the nature and extent of provision for the mental health needs of deaf people including the extent of domiciliary provision, the number of hostels, and the number of professional people in the National Health Service who are able to communicate fluently with the pre-lingually deaf people.

    Mr. Major The mental health needs of the majority of deaf people can be met within the general mental health services. Domiciliary provision and hostels form part of these general services, and are available to deaf people. However, information is not collected centrally about the extent of such domiciliary services or hostel provision, or about the number of professional people working in the National Health Service who are able to communicate fluently with pre-lingually deaf people.

    A small proportion of deaf people have a profound hearing handicap or are pre-lingually deaf, and require special communication skills from those who work with them. Such skills are available in the two specialist psychiatric units at Whittingham hospital, Preston, and Springfield hospital, London.