---

Cancer Treatment

My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Campbell-Savours for initiating this interesting and important debate. I must first declare an interest as a former radiographer. As far as I am aware, I am the only radiographer ever to have been a Member of Parliament or a Member of the House of Lords, which perhaps demonstrates what rare creatures we are. There is undoubtedly a need for more PET scanners, as my noble friend has rightly said. Evidence exists about PETs and the good work that they do. Nuclear medicine brings with it its own set of problems. Whether the scanners are independently run by a private service or established with the National Health Service, the same problems exist and need to be carefully thought through. Capital cost is of course one consideration. But of primary importance is where they should be sited, a decision which should not be taken without a great deal of consultation and thought. First, the workforce has to be available. The specialist teams of radiographers, medical physicists and radiologists all have to have the right expertise and training to enable them to work as a team in safety. Safety is all important. As with all nuclear medicine procedures, the radiation dose is high. I understand that there is evidence that it is higher than any other nuclear medical examination. The workforce will need to be managed so that they have longer breaks because of the dangers of higher-dose radiation. Thus, although the capital funding will be high, the revenue funding needed will be greater for PET than for any other form of radiation dose. Indeed, the increasing use of nuclear radiation has highlighted my considerable concern at the proposal to increase the hours worked by radiographers in Agenda for Change. Can my noble friend tell the House whether the dangers from nuclear radiation will be taken into account in controlling the hours worked by radiographers working with PET scanners both in the National Health Service and in private medicine? The other important point to consider is the storage and accessibility of the radioisotopes, a point just outlined by my noble friend. It would certainly make sense to have a central production facility. It could be in a university within a reasonable distance of the PET scanners, and with cyclotron facilities. I have been told that radioisotopes have a short half-life of around two hours. If that is so, accessibility and safety will be major considerations. I have covered capital and revenue costs, staff, sitting, accessibility and safety. All these factors play their part, but no progress can be made without suitably trained staff. Radiotherapy, for example, suffers from a severe shortage of radiographers, exacerbated by the increasing pressure of cancer treatment targets and the lack of availability of staff and time to facilitate the education and development necessary to support advanced practice initiatives. That is not to say that nothing is happening to correct the shortfall. In December 2003, the Department of Health set up a project to address recruitment and retention of radiographers with a target of increasing the radiography workforce in England by 1,000 by December 2005. I myself, as a former radiographer, received a letter inviting me to return to the profession. That is proof that no stone, however old, is being left unturned. It would be interesting to hear from the Minister what progress is being made. The Society of Radiographers is extremely active in promoting the ever-expanding role and widening opportunities available in the profession. The establishment of a world radiography day in November and the House of Commons reception have helped to highlight the role of the profession and its importance. Many of its advisory groups meet with representatives from the Department of Health and other professionals to discuss issues of mutual interest. The society’s advisory group on nuclear medicine has recently taken part in consultations to extend the PET service in England. So this debate could not be more timely. It has also enabled me to pay tribute to the often unsung work done by radiographers throughout the world. In doing so, I also wish to thank the Society of Radiographers and its officers for keeping me and people like me up to date on the rapidly changing world of radiography. It is a profession of which we can justifiably be proud.