Train timetables and television schedules would have to be adjusted.The proposal is part of Lord Archer’s bid to become mayor of London. The Tory peer believes it will be popular in the capital because it would give Londoners extra daylight in the summer evenings.However, the move will infuriate his fellow Conservatives who will argue that such a change would encourage the break-up of the United Kingdom. It could also cause problems in the North of England where the time of dusk is more similar to that in Edinburgh than London.But Lord Archer believes the change could help to reduce crime as most burglaries and muggings take place in the evenings rather than before dawn. Simon Mudd, 18, a chemistry student from Chester-le-Street, Co Durham, said: “To be honest it’s a bit of a hassle having to walk to and from the university.” He added: “Being a first-year, it means I’m missing out on mingling with the rest of the freshers in the halls.”. ENGLAND AND Scotland could be put into different time zones under proposals to be laid before Parliament. Lord Archer of Weston- super-Mare, the millionaire novelist, has drawn up a backbench Bill proposing that the Scottish and Welsh parliaments should have the power to set their own clocks. Under the plan, MPs at Westminster would also be able to decide what the time should be in England.
If passed, the legislation would almost certainly mean that Scotland, where it gets dark earlier in winter, would be an hour ahead of England and Wales.

In these services, about one call in four was judged life- threatening. However, the ambulance services are not permitted to let other, less serious incidents slip beyond the 14/19-minute standard.Andrew Foster, controller of the commission, said: “What people lack is somewhere to call in an emergency They call 999 because they don’t know where else to call Having access to help is what counts.”. So it is vital to consider whether some 999 calls could receive a different response,” the report says.A two-tier system is being tried in eight areas, to be extended nationally by 2001, where ambulance controllers are required to identify life-threatening incidents by questioning the caller and getting an ambulance to them within eight minutes. Although most callers are genuinely worried, and there is little overt abuse of the service, the report by the Audit Commission suggests that some might be treated on the spot or by paramedics who would travel by motorcycle to 999 callers’ homes.
It costs pounds 100 to call out an ambulance and, on average, a person does so once every 16 years. Last year, ambulances responded to 3.2 million emergencies and 1.2 million urgent calls from GPs wanting patients admitted – a 40 per cent rise since 1990.Almost one in four of the 38 ambulance services in England and Wales failed to meet national 999 targets specifying they should respond to 95 per cent of calls within 14 minutes in urban areas and 19 minutes in rural areas.

“If growth in demand continues, services will find further efficiency improvements harder and harder to make. THE 999 ambulance service is being overwhelmed by rising demand and may be unable to respond rapidly to emergencies in the future unless it weeds out non-urgent calls, an NHS watchdog reports. Up to 12 per cent of calls are for minor ailments such as cuts and bruises, and in London it has been estimated that up to one-third of the 1,000 calls a month could be handled without taking the patient to a hospital accident and emergency department. At present the situation is “very variable” across the country, Sir Norman said.Patients who urgently need to see a consultant should be seen within two weeks and those with less urgent conditions should be seen within three months.Patients waiting for a hospital to diagnose their condition should not have to wait longer than six weeks after the initial consultation, as waiting for a diagnosis can be the most stressful time.People with urgent conditions should be admitted to hospital within two weeks, because further delay could lead to the illness worsening.Those with serious disabilities, such as cataract and hip replacements, should be admitted within three months of being on the waiting list.No patient with a less urgent condition should have to wait more than a year.The committee also recommends that people on either GP or hospital waiting lists should have the waiting time deadline listed next to their name.”There are lots of difficulties in getting the data but that doesn’t mean one shouldn’t encourage the attempt to do it,” Sir Norman said.Mr Dobson said that the department was “keen to see greater consistency across the NHS on this as part of the overall approach to modernising the waiting system”.. “The important thing we need to know is the number of patients we fail,” he said.Frank Dobson, Secretary of State for Health, has written to Sir Norman, saying that the Government “fully recognises the importance of ensuring that decisions about treatment for patients on NHS waiting lists are on the basis of clinical need”.The committee’s targets say that a wait for a non-urgent appointment with a GP should never be longer than seven days. Presidents from Britain’s royal medical colleges and doctors representing the British Medical Association demanded that the Department of Health adopt four new waiting list targets to “empower patients”.
The Government has pledged to bring down the waiting list by 100,000 during this Parliament.But Professor Sir Norman Browse, chairman of the Joint Consultants Committee, said the real waiting list, and the measure of the efficiency of the NHS, should be the number of patients who have not been seen within appropriate time limits.