My hon. Friend has been in the House as long as I have—we entered together in 1987—and she has a remarkable ability to predict what Ministers are about to say or to guide them to what they should say next. On this occasion, I was about to deal with that important point. In addressing the serious health issues for those infected with TB and ensuring that they get the services that they deserve and need, we need to be very careful—I think that the hon. Gentleman was trying to be careful—not to add further to stigma and alarm in our communities and, therefore, inadvertently put further barriers in the way of those people coming forward for treatment.

TB is not a threat to the general population of the UK—I do not think that the hon. Gentleman meant to imply that—and that is why the Government of the day stopped the inoculations for TB. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman is old enough to remember—I certainly am—when we had to have those inoculations at school. The risks have considerably diminished, and the strategy to tackle TB—informed by the science and the analysis by the Department of Health—is now based around an action plan with three specific themes: first, to reduce the risk of people being newly infected with TB; secondly, to provide high-quality treatment and care for all people with TB; and thirdly to maintain low levels of drug resistance, especially multi-drug resistant TB. I shall explain why that is important, although having heard the details of my hon. Friend's constituent's case I can see why she thinks that those three principles were not followed.

Two thirds of all TB cases occur in people who have come to live in the UK, and some 39 per cent. of all cases in 2007 were in London. My hon. Friend mentioned screening, but most TB is categorised as latent and non-infectious, and is therefore difficult to detect. In as many as a third of all cases, especially in those travelling to the UK to live and work, the TB will be latent. Only roughly one in 10 will go on to develop active TB that is infectious to others.

Regrettably, there is no reliable test to determine which latent TB carrier will develop the active disease. That should reassure the hon. Gentleman about the work that the Department and the health service are doing to reach out to the very groups that he and my hon. Friend identified. Perhaps I should at this point address the question of whether there is screening. I suppose the answer is yes and no, so I shall try to be more specific.

The long-standing policy is that immigrants from high-prevalence countries who seek to enter the UK for more than six months are screened for TB on arrival at the port of entry. A scheme to test applicants overseas rather than at the point of entry began in 2005 and testing currently occurs in seven high-incidence countries. So, to answer my hon. Friend's point, there is some screening, but she is quite right that it is not systematic screening of everyone, and nor could it be—nor should it be, in my opinion. Such proposals need to be proportionate to the risk, which means that there is not screening across the board for very obvious reasons.

As my hon. Friend pointed out, the PCT in Hackney has the 11th highest rate of TB in the city—just over 60 cases per 100,000 people. That is not the highest rate in London, but the lowest is 6.7 per 100,000. The data for the past five years show that rates in City and Hackney PCT have been declining and continue to do so.