Search Results

1-9 of 9 results for subject:Poisons

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

Dept for Environment Food and Rural Affairs

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what she expects her Department to publish the criteria for the treatment of toxic waste. - Including ref to Landfill Regulations 2002. (Holding answer 12 July 2004).

Asked by

Tim Yeo (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

1 September 2004

Reference

183396; 424 c819W

House

House of Commons

Dept of Health

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, for which Pesticides Safety Directorate and Health and Safety Executive approved pesticides and biocides there are no assays for biological samples in human poisoning cases held by the NHS.

Asked by

David Drew (Labour; Co-operative Party)

Answering body

Department of Health

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

21 July 2004

Reference

184451; 424 c366W

House

House of Commons

Dept of Health

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, on how many occasions, in each of the last five years, NHS medical staff working within the chemical and laboratory facilities associated with the National Poisons Information Service have sent biological samples from patients for biochemical assay to agrochemical companies; which companies...

Asked by

David Drew (Labour; Co-operative Party)

Answering body

Department of Health

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

21 July 2004

Reference

184452; 424 c355W

House

House of Commons

Warner, Lord

Whether the publication Current Awareness in Clinical Toxicology, produced by the Birmingham centre of the National Poisons Information Service, is available to the public under the Environmental Information Regulations or whether it will be under the draft Environmental Information Regulations [HL 1579].

Asked by

Countess of Mar (Crossbench)

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

24 March 2004

Reference

HL 1579; 659 c100WA

House

House of Lords

Warner, Lord

From which pesticide classes has the Birmingham centre of the National Poisons Information Service produced TOXBASE entries; whether the entries include human poisoning data from clinical studies or experience or adverse effects data from animal studies; and whether they will place a copy of these entries in the Library of...

Asked by

Countess of Mar (Crossbench)

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

24 March 2004

Reference

HL 1577; 659 c100WA

House

House of Lords

Warner, Lord

Whether TOXBASE entries are available to the public under the Environmental Information Regulations currently in force, under the draft Environmental Information Regulations or under any other regulation or code. [HL 1578].

Asked by

Countess of Mar (Crossbench)

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

18 March 2004

Reference

HL 1578; 659 c62WA

House

House of Lords

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his Answer of 20th January, 416 c1205W, on animal welfare, ref 147328, with reference to recommendation 12, what steps the Government has taken to urge EU member states to make replacements a priority.

Asked by

Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

12 February 2004

For answer on

2 March 2004

Answered on

2 March 2004

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his answer of 20 January 2004, Official Report, column 1205W, on animal welfare, with reference to recommendation 12, what steps the Government have taken to urge EU member states to make replacements a priority. [155972] Caroline Flint: In its report, published in July 2002, the House of Lords Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures recommended that the United Kingdom Government should use their influence to urge the European Union to make the development and validation of replacements for animal experiments a priority, particularly in toxicology. In our response, published in January 2003, the Government noted the Select Committee's view and agreed that replacement should be the ultimate goal. We also explained that we do not believe that it should be made a priority at the expense of reduction or refinement, as these are where progress can be made more quickly. We are instead fully committed to the furtherance of all of the 3Rs--the replacement of animal use, reduction of the number of animals used and the refinement of the procedures involved to minimise suffering. United Kingdom Government Departments and agencies are involved in a number of specific initiatives in the European Union to develop, validate and incorporate more advanced test methods into regulatory practice. The Government also continue to support the work of the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) and the head of the Home Office Animals Scientific Procedures Division is now the United Kingdom representative on the ECVAM Scientific Advisory Committee and is contributing to discussions about the future direction of ECVAM's work. The Government also warmly welcome the liaison between ECVAM and its United States counterpart, the Interagency Co-ordinating Committee for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), as a means of achieving greater progress, more quickly and ensuring commitment from more than one economic region. Quick gains cannot necessarily be expected, but we shall continue our efforts to persuade other member states of the importance of progress on the 3Rs.

Date

2 March 2004

Reference

418 c894-5W;418 c910-1W; 155972

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his Answer of 20th January, 416 c1205W, on animal welfare, ref 147328, with reference to recommendation 11, which Government department is taking the lead on the systematic and visible search for 3Rs methods in toxicology; where that Department's...

Asked by

Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

12 February 2004

For answer on

2 March 2004

Answered on

2 March 2004

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his Answer of 20 January 2004, Official Report, column 1205W, on animal welfare, ref 147328, with reference to recommendation 11, which Government department is taking the lead on the systematic and visible search for 3Rs methods in toxicology; where that Department's progress can be viewed; and if he will make a statement. [155971] Caroline Flint: In its report, published in July 2002, the House of Lords Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures recommended that the Government and the scientific community should engage in a systematic and visible search for methods involving the 3Rs--the replacement of animal use, reduction of the number of animals used and the refinement of the procedures involved to minimise suffering--in toxicology and that the Government should nominate one department to take the lead on this. In the Government's response to the Select committee's report, published in January 2003, we agreed that a systematic and visible effort is required. As a first step, the Home Office is currently leading a review of the scope for improving the application of the 3Rs and promoting research into alternatives through the Inter-Departmental Group on the 3Rs. Membership of the Inter-Departmental Group is drawn from the Home Office, the Department of Health, the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Department of Trade and Industry, the Office of Science and Technology, the Health and Safety Executive and other agencies. The work of the group includes exploration of the case for a United Kingdom centre for research into the 3Rs, which was also recommended by the House of Lords Select Committee, a review of the implementation of the Inter-Departmental Data-Sharing Concordat, announced in August 2000, and the review and revision of the Guidelines on Regulatory Toxicology and Safety Evaluation Studies, published in February 2001, and the statement of principles concerning animal welfare endorsed by the Home Office and other regulatory authorities in 1999--Annex 1 to the Regulatory Toxicology Guidelines. I am currently considering the Inter-Departmental Group's further advice on the proposed United Kingdom centre for research into the 3Rs. I expect to receive the findings of the Inter-Departmental Group on the other two issues shortly and will then consider what further steps are required. Minutes of the meetings of the Inter-Departmental Group are published on the Home Office website at http:// www.homeoffice.gov.uk/docs2/interdept3rs.html.

Date

2 March 2004

Reference

418 c893-4W;418 c909-10W; 155971

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his Answer of 20th January, 416 c1205W, on animal welfare, what factors underlay the decision not to invite expert scientific opinion opposed to primate experimentation to take part in the forum, with particular reference to (a) Animal Aid...

Asked by

Mike Hancock (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

12 February 2004

For answer on

2 March 2004

Answered on

2 March 2004

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his answer of 20 January 2004, Official Report, column 1205W, on animal welfare, what factors underlay the decision not to invite expert scientific opinion opposed to primate experimentation to take part in the forum, with particular reference to (a) Animal Aid and (b) Europeans For Medical Advancement. [156017] Caroline Flint: The aim of the stakeholder forum, which was held on 9 January 2004, was to hold informed debate on the recommendations contained in the Animal Procedures Committee's (APC) report entitled "The use of primates under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986--analysis of current trends with particular reference to regulatory toxicology". This in turn was to assist preparation of a ministerial response to the issues which the APC has raised. The Home Office and the APC agreed that, in order to hold a focused debate, attendance at the forum should be limited to organisations with practical experience in the use of primates in scientific procedures, or with other particular expertise relevant to the report's recommendations. Consequently, invitees included holders of related project licences issued under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, from both the commercial and academic sectors, as well as individuals from funding and regulatory organisations and other Government Departments. Groups with expertise in alternatives to animal experiments were also invited to send representatives. It was decided that representatives from animal protection organisations such as Animal Aid and Europeans For Medical Advancement should not be invited to comment through this forum. Places at the forum were limited and the Home Office and the APC primarily wanted to test the technical basis and the practicalities of the recommendations with those experts in the use of primates best placed to contribute to such an exercise. A report on the forum will be placed on the Home Office and APC websites in the near future, and I would be pleased to receive informed comments from any other source before I further consider all the issues raised.

Legislation

Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986

Date

2 March 2004

Reference

418 c895-6W;418 c911-2W; 156017

House

House of Commons

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Month

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher