Amess accuses Government of failing to deliver on Sexual Health

Friday 10th February 2006

On Thursday 9th February 2006, David Amess MP took part in the Westminster Hall debate on the report by the Health Select Committee, of which he is a member, on Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS that was published last year.

In his speech he pressed the Secretary of State for Public Health, Caroline Flint MP on the Government’s inadequate response to the Committee’s report. One particular issue that David raised was his concerns over the rising rates of Chlamydia, gonorrhoea and syphilis and the increasing waiting times for appointments at GUM Clinics. Evidence from the All Party Parliamentary Pro Choice and Sexual Health Group showed that only 22% of people in Southend West received an appointment at a GUM Clinic within the 48 hour appointment target. Part of the reason why these clinics struggle to meet their treatment targets is because they are hugely under funded; often operating from portacabins as the Health Select Committee found when they conducted visits as part of their enquiry.

The Government has made plans for a large public education campaign to encourage more people, especially men, to be proactive about testing for sexually infected diseases. However, this will only be effective if the clinics have the capacity to treat the extra patients that such a campaign would create.

So far the Government has failed to make sexual health a priority in its health policy, for example, in the new GP contract there are no points available for ‘essential services’ and only one available for ‘additional services out of the 1500 points on offer and as these points are linked to funding there is no incentive for GPs to prioritise sexual health care.

On HIV/AIDS David spoke about the shocking 53,000 new cases that were reported last year with an annual increase rate of 20%. And worse,

‘The Terrance Higgins Trust, which I think everyone respects, showed that 75% of individuals diagnosed with HIV waited at least nine months before seeking testing or treatment, a third waited at least 18 months for similar services. I would like to hear from the Minister hoe the Government will try to address that.’

David also spoke about the Government’s regulations on treatment tourism that are currently so complicated that they are open to wide misinterpretation. The eligibility requirements that exclude failed asylum seekers negatively affect ethnic minorities and foreign individuals that may be carrying the disease. Furthermore, to delve into the immigratory status of each patient that comes for treatment is not practical and there are ethical implications for a health professional or clerical worker in refusing someone treatment that badly needs it.

David concluded by saying

‘This was an excellent report, and from the Committee’s point of view, I simply ask the Minister this. Can we please have an answer to the question about how the Government has delivered so far on our recommendations? There is a problem, and all of us recognise that it needs addressing urgently.’

The Minister of State made the point in her reply to the debate that the responsibility for Sexual health must lie with individuals to make sensible choices about their sexual health.

‘We live in a changing world. People have more sexual partners and therefore there is a greater risk of contracting an STI. Although people often enter into a relationship with the hope that it will last a lifetime, it does not always do so. Co-habiting couples, whether same-sex or involving men and women, and married relationships can break up. So there are issues to face up to about how, throughout the sexually active part of our lives, we ensure that we continue to have discussions about how sex will affect us in the future.

I have had some interesting discussions with members of the independent advisory group on sexual health and HIV, and others, about people who have been in long-term relationships. Such a relationship might last for 20 years, for example, but the last time the people involved discussed contraception issues and STIs might have been a long time ago. They might suddenly find themselves active again and going into an arena with a mindset based on the situation 20 years previously, not on what it needs to be based on today.
It is important that such things are thought about in this general context; otherwise, the sorts of services that people need cannot be delivered and the sorts of communication campaigns and material that meet the needs of very different groups cannot be developed. We need people to respond and, hopefully, to take on board their personal challenges and personal responsibilities in this area’

Commenting on the debate and the Minister’s comments David said,

‘This was an excellent debate on what I consider to be a very important issue in health care provision. Preventative measures and public education campaigns are important but they must go hand in hand with sufficient funding to treat the extra patients that this will create.’