|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
25 Feb 2004 : Column 484Wcontinued
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the dangers to young people's health of regularly drinking carbonated soft drinks. 
Miss Melanie Johnson [holding answer 23 February 2004]: Carbonated soft drinks are a major source of added sugars in children's and young people's diets. It is recommended that they should be consumed sparingly, as part of a healthy balanced diet, to minimise the effect of dental caries and to achieve calorie intake compatible with maintenance of healthy weight.
The Food Standards Agency and the Department of Health are in discussion with the vending industry and are taking forward projects to consider approaches in schools to achieve this recommendation.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what percentage of (a) 8-year-olds, (b) 9-year-olds, (c) 10-year-olds, (d) 11-year-olds, (e) 5-year-olds, (f) 6-year-olds and (g) 7-year-olds were subject to height and weight monitoring in schools last year as part of the Child Health Surveillance programme; 
Dr. Ladyman: Height and weight measurements in early childhood form a part of the child health surveillance programme. The programme covers pre-school age children. Intervals between checks are determined by the primary health care team in the light of professional judgment. Height and weight monitoring after school entry is undertaken on a selective basis when there is concern about a child's health or growth. Information on the number and timing of these checks is not collected centrally.
Mrs. Roche: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps his Department is taking to achieve the Government's targets of (a) ending child poverty by 2020, (b) halving it by 2010 and (c) reducing it by a quarter by 200405; and if he will make a statement. 
Miss Melanie Johnson: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply given by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Pond) on 12 February 2004, Official Report, columns 159091W.
Mr. Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) in what ways eligibility criteria for chiropody waiting
25 Feb 2004 : Column 485W
lists have changed in the last two years; and how many patients have been removed from waiting lists as a result of changes in eligibility criteria; 
(3) how the eligibility criteria for chiropody waiting lists have changed in the last two years. 
Dr. Ladyman [holding answers 23 and 24 February 2004]: Primary care trusts, in partnership with strategic health authorities and other local stakeholders, have the responsibility for improving the health of the community, securing the provision of high quality services, and integrating health and social care locally. They have the resources to commission services and to identify the number of professional staff that they need to deliver those services. This process provides the means for addressing local needs within the health community including setting eligibility criteria for chiropody/podiatry services. Information on waiting lists for these services is not collected centrally.
Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many coronary angioplasties were undertaken by each NHS hospital trust in each of the last three years; and how many of these were (a) second and (b) third interventions. 
Miss Melanie Johnson: Information on the number of coronary angioplasties that were undertaken by each national health service hospital trust in each of the last three years has been placed in the Library.
The figures are sourced from Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Department of Health. Information on second and third interventions is not available.
Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many coronary artery bypass graphs were undertaken by each NHS hospital trust in each of the last three years. 
Miss Melanie Johnson: Information on the number of coronary artery bypass graphs that were undertaken by each national health service hospital trust in each of the last three years has been placed in the Library.
The figures are sourced from Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Department of Health.
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients with haemophilia there are in (a) England and (b) the South West; and if he will make a statement. 
Miss Melanie Johnson: Information provided by the United Kingdom Haemophilia Centre Doctors Organisation shows that there are 5,019 haemophilia patients in England and 297 patients in the South West. These figures include patients affected by severe and mild haemophilia.
25 Feb 2004 : Column 486W
Dr. Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the rationale was for the decision to disallow compensation from the Hepatitis C ex gratia scheme for the dependants of those who died of the disease prior to 29 August 2003. 
Miss Melanie Johnson: The underlying principle behind the Hepatitis C ex gratia payment scheme is to target available resources to help alleviate the suffering of people living with the virus. The payments are not designed to compensate for bereavement. The scheme's eligibility criteria reflect this, but were considered in the context of other demands on the health care budget.
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to his answer of 20 January 2004, Official Report, column 1110W, on long-term care, whether the methodology used to arrive at this figure is the same as that used to cost the Government's own policies; and if he will place in the Library a copy of the terms of reference given to the civil servants costing the policy. 
Dr. Ladyman: The estimate of £1.5 billion is an updated estimate of the cost of free personal care for England. The methodology used to produce this updated estimate was identical to that used by the Royal Commission, except for two differences. The first difference is that the Royal Commission did not include an explicit allowance for costs of publicly funded care home residents. These costs are now estimated at £100 million and are included in the updated estimate. The second difference is that the updated estimate takes into account changes to the funding arrangements made by the Government since the Royal Commission produced its estimate. Had no account been taken, the updated estimate would have been higher. The main change is the implementation of free nursing care. Ministers gave no instructions or terms of references to civil servants concerning how the calculation of the updated estimate was to be made.
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 30 January 2004, Official Report, column 559W, on long-term care, which specific benefits are referred to in point seven of the explanatory note; how the savings of under £200 million were calculated; and whether any of the 58,000 privately funded residents of residential care homes mentioned in the explanatory note were in homes with dual registration, and therefore entitled to free nursing care. 
Dr. Ladyman: The social security benefits referred to in point seven of the note are attendance allowance and disability living allowance care component. These benefits cease to be paid after four weeks of local authority support. Disability living allowance mobility component does not cease to be paid and is not included.
Estimates of the proportions of older privately funded admissions to care homes receiving these benefits were derived from tables 4.13 and 4.14 of the Personal Social Services Research Unit report, Self-Funded Admissions to Care Homes (available at www. dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rrep159.asp). These proportions
25 Feb 2004 : Column 487W
were applied to the estimate numbers of privately funded care home residents to produce an estimate of the numbers of privately funded residents receiving these benefits. The estimated numbers were multiplied by the benefit rates to produce an estimated annual saving of under £200 million.
The approach assumed estimates of 42,000 privately funded residents in nursing beds in nursing homes or dual-registered homes and 58,000 privately funded residents in residential beds in residential care homes or dual-registered homes. Reference to dual-registered beds was omitted from the note for simplicity. This means that none of the estimated 58,000 were assumed to be entitled to free nursing care. This assumption does not, however, affect the estimated saving on disability benefits since receipt of free nursing care does not trigger cessation of disability benefits.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|