|

Yesterday in Parliament: Dr Spink on UKIP health policy and on fighting terrorism

 

Just three of Bob’s many activities in Parliament yesterday.
Counter-Terrorism Bill
Jacqui Smith: … Our amendments will strengthen the role of Parliament….

Bob Spink (Castle Point) (UKIP): I am grateful to the Home Secretary. She is being extremely generous. Perhaps it would help the House if she explained whether she envisages that the circumstances of intelligence revealing that there was a specific and serious threat—for instance, against the people working in the City of London or in other areas of London—would operate the trigger that she referred to. About 8,000 of my constituents work in London, on the front line of the world terrorist threat. Anything she can do to improve protection of them will be much welcomed by the country.

Jacqui Smith: The hon. Gentleman well understands the nature of the threat that we face. It aims to cause mass casualties of the sort of people that he describes. That is the type of serious terrorist threat that we are seeking to tackle. The hon. Gentleman is right to remind us whom we are trying to protect.

----------------------

EDM 1746   PROCEDURE ON THE EU CONSTITUTIONAL TREATY  10.06.2008

Bob Spink (Castle Point) (UKIP

That this House notes the exceptional importance of the events of the week of 9th June 2008 to the future independence of the UK and the supremacy of Parliament; welcomes the judicial review, obtained by Stuart Wheeler, which seeks to secure the promised referendum on the Lisbon Treaty; further looks forward to the debate in the other House and hopes that their Lordships will support the promised referendum; further notes that the Irish people have been allowed a referendum, the results of which will be declared on 13th June; and urges the Government to start to rebuild people's trust in politicians by giving people a vote, as promised, on the Lisbon Treaty, which is in all material effects the EU Constitution that was previously rejected.

---------------------------
And on UKIP Health policy: 
Spink: “One reason why the UK Independence party wants to repatriate the £15 billion annual cost of our membership of the EU is to invest more in specialist services, such as immediate trauma care and health care generally. That is another sound UKIP policy.”
Specialist Trauma Response Teams  Edited notes from Hansard:
Bob Spink (Castle Point) (UKIP): First, I must declare an interest: my son is a consultant neurosurgeon.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. Oaten) on securing a debate on this important issue. He raised some interesting points. We are fortunate today to have an excellent Front-Bench team, and I am delighted to see the Minister in his place, as I know him to be a caring man. The Government have invested much more in health over the past decade, and I congratulate them on that. However, our constituents do not see a proportionate improvement in health care. We are debating an area in which a little of that extra spending might give more results that people would welcome; I ask the Minister to consider that point.

The hon. Member for Winchester mentioned the different approaches taken by various countries, and we clearly need to review the way in which we provide immediate, on-the-spot care for trauma patients. The hon. Gentleman focused on the first few moments of care. I want to extend that to the first few hours. He mentioned the importance of breathing, clearing airways and similar issues, but I want to focus on head injuries.

Research and experience indicate that there should be no more than four hours between injury and operation if there are expanding mass lesions, such as extradural or acute subdural haematomas. Only 20 per cent. of  patients with severe head injuries are treated within those four hours. The problem is not the one hour leading to the CT scan. That is usually met; the response is pretty good. The problem is largely with the inter-hospital transfer—from the hospital that first receives the patient to the specialist hospital capable of dealing with severe head injuries. That is where the problem lies.

The ambulance service and the hospital management team probably consider that, because the patient is already in hospital and in a secure and safe environment, the need to move the patient to another specialist hospital within the four hours is not so important—the priority is lost or diminished. That perception is one reason why the four-hour limit is not met in 80 per cent. of cases. That four-hour limit should be a top priority. If that limit can be met, the outcome for the patient is so much better. However, when it is not met, the outcome becomes worse as the minutes and hours go by. Many patients die who could otherwise have been saved; and others suffer severe and permanent disabilities who otherwise would recover well to lead full lives. Although it is important to treat a collapsed lung, once the patient is in hospital it will not kill them. However, a head injury can kill or cause permanent and severe damage. We need to focus on that specific but small issue. I am sure that the Minister is listening carefully.

A good development that the Government are pursuing is the specialist trauma centres. Patients suffering multiple traumas are taken there in the first instance rather than to a general hospital. That is extremely helpful, because it does away with the inter-hospital transfer. The four-hour limit is more likely to be met, and the outcome for patients with severe head injuries and other traumas will therefore be much better. I welcome and support the Government’s move on specialist trauma centres.

The hon. Member for Winchester spoke of funding, and I shall follow him. One reason why the UK Independence party wants to repatriate the £15 billion cost of our membership of the EU is to invest more in specialist services, such as immediate trauma care and health care generally. That is another sound UKIP policy.

Mr. Mark Oaten (Winchester) (LD):

Air ambulances are critical to the ability to save lives after a traumatic incident… I understand that, in London, daytime provision….

 Bob Spink (Castle Point) (UKIP): I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman’s flow, because he is being extremely eloquent in showing how much he cares about this important issue. I congratulate him on securing the debate. Is he aware that when the new Queen’s hospital opened in east London, with a specialist neurosurgical centre, the local council placed restrictions on the landing of air ambulances delivering patients at certain times of day? That was an unhelpful interpretation ……etc.

Mr. Oaten: I was not aware of that, and I find it extraordinary that a local council representing potential patients would take that decision. Certainly, my conversations with the chief executive of Southampton hospital suggest that he would not have that kind of difficulty with Southampton city council. He thinks that the population would strongly welcome hearing the sound of a helicopter and would find it reassuring.    …It is not for me to tell any of the three political parties what would be an eye-catching issue at the next general election—

Bob Spink: But will the hon. Gentleman accept that there are four political parties, please?   UKIP and the other three!

Mr. Oaten: Four, five, six or seven—anyone is entitled to put forward the policy….