Previous Section Index Home Page

22 Jul 2004 : Column 470W—continued

United Healthcare

Mr. Burstow: To ask the Prime Minister on what dates special advisers from his Office have met representatives of United Healthcare since 1 May; which of his special advisers took part in each meeting; and where each meeting was held. [186144]

The Prime Minister: My officials and I have meetings and discussions with a wide range of organisations and individuals. As with previous Administrations it is not the Government's practice to provide details of all such meetings, under Exemptions 2 and 7 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.


CITES (Contravention)

Norman Baker: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what instances of international trade in contravention of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) have been (a) identified and (b) apprehended by UK authorities since January 2001, broken down by (i) species and (ii) CITES category; and if he will make a statement. [185898]

John Healey: HM Customs and Excise made 237 seizures of endangered species imported in air or sea freight in 2003.
Number of seizuresNumber of items seizedWeight of items seized (kg)
Live animals and birds892,905
Parts and derivatives of endangered species791,443
Other CITES listed species14302
Preparations of oriental medicines that include parts or derivatives of64,220,807
endangered species12467.0

22 Jul 2004 : Column 471W

Seizures may be recorded by weight or number of seizures of items such as traditional Chinese medicines may be recorded either according to the individual count of capsules or according to the quantity of containers.

Equivalent breakdowns for 2001 or 2002 would only be available at disproportionate cost. Information on CITES category is not recorded against individual seizures and in some cases the species could not be covered by two or more of the annexes in EU Regulation.


Andrew Mackinlay: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many and what percentage of deaths were caused by MRSA, or had MRSA as a contributing factor, in the last year for which figures are available, broken down by hospital; and if he will make a statement. [184410]

Ruth Kelly: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.

Letter from Len Cook to Mr. Andrew Mackinlay dated 22 July 2004:

Number of deaths where MRSA was a contributory factor(35),by hospital 2

Hospital nameNo. of deaths where MRSA was a contributory factorPercentage of all deaths
England and Wales7210.2
Hospitals with five or more deaths where MRSA was a contributory factor
Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge100.6
Alexandra Hospital, Redditch50.7
Arrowe Park Hospital, Birkenhead50.3
Ashford Hospital60.9
Birmingham Heartlands Hospital170.9
Bristol Royal Infirmary60.5
Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford80.6
City Hospital, Winson Green100.7
Conquest Hospital, St. Leonards on Sea90.7
Derriford Hospital, Plymouth221.1
Freeman Hospital, Newcastle90.9
General Hospital, Bishop Auckland50.8
General Hospital, Southampton70.3
General Infirmary, Leeds110.6
George Eliot Hospital, Nuneaton50.4
Hull Royal Infirmary50.3
Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust90.5
King's College Hospital, London50.4
Lister Hospital, Stevenage50.4
Luton and Dunstable Hospital50.4
Maelor Hospital, Wrexham100.8
Medway Maritime Hospital, Gillingham130.8
Morriston Hospital, Swansea70.5
Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton70.5
New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton80.4
Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital70.3
North Middlesex Hospital, Edmonton50.5
Prince Charles Hospital, Merthyr Tydfil60.6
Princess Margaret Hospital, Swindon50.4
Princess of Wales Hospital, Bridgend, Mid Glamorgan60.6
Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth150.7
Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston50.6
Royal Berkshire Hospital, Reading50.4
Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro50.4
Royal Infirmary, Doncaster60.4
Royal Infirmary, Huddersfield50.5
Royal Preston Hospital50.4
Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton60.4
Southmead Hospital, Bristol50.5
St. Helier Hospital, Carshalton50.4
St. Mary's Hospital, Westminster91.0
St. Thomas's Hospital, London90.8
Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Aylesbury50.7
Torbay Hospital50.4
University Hospital Aintree70.4
University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff80.4
University Hospital, Nottingham60.3
Warwick Hospital50.5
Whittington Hospital St. Mary's Wing, Islington60.7
Wycombe General Hospital50.6

(35) Identified using the methodology described in Griffiths C, Lamagni TL, Crowcroft NS, Duckworth G and Rooney C (2004) Trends in MRSA in England and Wales; analysis of morbidity and mortality data for 1993–2002. Health Statistics Quarterly 21, 15–22.
(36) Defined as general hospitals or multi-function sites using the ONS classification of establishment types.
Note: Figures are for deaths occurring in 2002.

22 Jul 2004 : Column 472W

Pensions Mis-selling (Compensation)

Adam Price: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many individual general pensions mis-selling cases have been settled by compensation in the last year for which figures are available. [185766]

Ruth Kelly: The Financial Services Authority, the Financial Ombudsman Service and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme are independent bodies.

I understand from the Financial Services Authority, the Financial Ombudsman Service and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme that the following pensions cases has been resolved in the last year.
22 Jul 2004 : Column 473W

Number of cases at 31 March 2004
Pensions review cases carried out by the financial industry23,600
Pensions review cases conducted by the Financial Services Authority in conjunction with the Financial Services Compensation Scheme for those firms that are unable to meet claims against them.3,335
Pension cases resolved by the Financial Ombudsman Service (including those cases relating to personal pensions, pensions review, free-standing additional voluntary contributions schemes, annuity contracts and all other products with a pensions element.)6,265

Adam Price: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what checks are carried out to ensure that compensation in cases of pension mis-selling are equivalent to reinstatement of the original pension scheme. [185767]

Ruth Kelly: I understand from the FSA that in the case of pension compensation cases which are part of the formal Pensions Review, recompense is not normally payable in the form of cash but by addition to the individual's pension. The term "redress" is apposite rather than the term "compensation".

Where a loss has been caused by non-compliant advice and reinstatement into the original pension scheme is available at fair cost, then an offer of reinstatement must be made.

Otherwise, the normal method of redress is by topping-up the individual's personal pension. The value of pension and other benefits that would have been available from the original pension scheme, is compared with that from the personal pension after allowing for any relevant differences in the individual's pension contributions. The shortfall in value is added to the personal pension as redress.

As the level of benefits and risks differ between pension arrangements the method of working out the value of benefits needs to allow for this. Under the Pensions Review, which reviewed sales of personal pensions between 29 April 1988 and 30 June 1994, and which is now virtually complete save for relatively few difficult cases, the following method and checks applied:

General pensions complaints are dealt with by the Financial Ombudsman Service for solvent firms and by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme for firms that are unable to meet claims against them.
22 Jul 2004 : Column 474W

Next Section Index Home Page