---

21 Feb 2005 : Column 312W—continued

General Practitioners

Mr. Flook: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average proportion of patients to general practitioner is in each primary care trust in (a) Somerset, (b) Devon, (c) Dorset and (d) North Somerset. [214616]

Ms Rosie Winterton: The average number of patients per general practitioner for each primary care trust (PCT) in Somerset, Devon, Dorset and North Somerset is shown in the table.
Average list size of unrestricted principals and equivalents (UPEs)⁽¹⁶⁸⁾ for specified PCTs Number (headcount)

	PCT	UPEs	Patients of UPEs	Average list size
5CE	Bournemouth	106	170,436	1,608
5 FT	East Devon	78	115,844	1,485
5FR	Exeter	85	131,297	1,545
5FX	Mendip	61	110,276	1,808
5FV	Mid Devon	75	105,718	1,410
5FQ	North Devon	113	156,543	1,385
5CD	North Dorset	66	91,061	1,380
5F1	Plymouth	159	260,369	1,638
5KV	Poole	109	172,143	1,579
5FW	Somerset Coast	92	143,437	1,559
5FN	South and East Dorset	105	152,625	1,454
5CV	South Hams and West Devon	72	104,468	1,451
5K1	South Somerset	99	150,087	1,516
5FP	South West Dorset	97	140,690	1,450
5K2	Taunton Deane	74	106,809	1,443
5FY	Teignbridge	68	108,439	1,595
5CW	Torbay	89	142,209	1,598

⁽¹⁶⁸⁾ UPEs include general medical service unrestricted principals, personal medical service contracted general practitioners and personal medical service salaried general practitioners. Patient data has been revised from previously published figures.
Note:
Data as at 30 September 2003.
Source:
Department of Health general and personal medical services statistics.

Mr. Flook: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many general practitioners there are in each primary care trust in (a) Somerset, (b) Devon, (c) Dorset and (d) North Somerset. [214617]

Ms Rosie Winterton: The number of general practitioners in these areas are shown in the table.
 
21 Feb 2005 : Column 313W
 

All practitioners (excluding retainers, registrars and locums)⁽¹⁶⁹⁾ for specified organisations as at 30 September 2003 Numbers (headcount)

5CE	Bournemouth PCT	107
5 FT	East Devon PCT	79
5FR	Exeter PCT	86
5FX	Mendip PCT	75
5FV	Mid Devon PCT	77
5FQ	North Devon PCT	114
5CD	North Dorset PCT	69
5KV	Poole PCT	109
5FW	Somerset Coast PCT	102
5FN	South and East Dorset PCT	107
5CV	South Hams and West Devon PCT	72
5K1	South Somerset PCT	103
5FP	South West Dorset PCT	97
5K2	Taunton Deane PCT	75

⁽¹⁶⁹⁾ All practitioners (excluding retainers, registrars and locums) includes general medical service (GMS) unrestricted principals, personal medical service (PMS) contracted general practitioners, PMS salaried GPs, restricted principals, assistants, salaried doctors, PMS other, flexible career scheme GPs and GP returners.
Source:
Department of Health GMS and PMS statistics.

Health Expenditure (Leicester, South)

Mr. Gill: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the health expenditure per head of population in Leicester, South constituency has been in each year since 1997. [215733]

Dr. Ladyman: It is not possible to provide expenditure figures for the Leicester, South constituency, as this does not correspond to any specific health authority (HA) area. The information shown in the table is from the relevant HA areas from 1996–97 to 2003–04, which is the latest year for which figures are available.
Expenditure per weighted head of population in the relevant HA areas £ per head

	Leicestershire HA area	Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland Strategic Health Authority area
1996–97	635.71	n/a
1997–98	617.54	n/a
1998–99	654.02	n/a
1999–2000	762.80	n/a
2000–01	779.71	n/a
2001–02	821.16	n/a
2002–03	n/a	951.51
2003–04	n/a	1,082.64

Notes:
1. Expenditure is taken from audited health authority summarisation forms and primary care trust summarisation schedules, which are prepared on a resource basis and therefore differ from cash allocations in the year. The expenditure is the total expenditure by the relevant HAs, and the commissioner costs of the primary care trusts (PCTs). Figures are given in cash terms.
2. Allocations per weighted head of population provide a much more reliable measure to identify differences between funding of HAs and PCTs.
3. Figures for 1996–97 to 2001–02 have been prepared using gross expenditure figures. This is to ensure consistency between years. Figures based on strategic health authority (SHA) areas have been adjusted to eliminate expenditure, which would be double counted where an authority acts as a lead in commissioning healthcare or other services.
4. In many HAs, there are factors, which distort the expenditure. These include:
the health authority acting in a lead capacity to commission healthcare or fund training on behalf of other health bodies; and
asset revaluations in national health service trusts being funded through health authorities or primary care trusts.
5. The majority of general dental services expenditure is not included in the individual health authority accounts or primary care trust summarisation schedules and is separately accounted for by the Dental Practice Board. An element of pharmaceutical services expenditure is accounted for by the Prescription Pricing Authority and not by health authorities or primary care trusts. Total expenditure on these items by the Dental Practice Board and the Prescription Pricing Authority cannot be allocated to individual health bodies. For these reasons, expenditure per head cannot be compared reliably between health authorities or between different years.
6. Expenditure on general dental services and pharmaceutical services accounted for by the Dental Practice Board and Prescription Pricing Authority, respectively, are excluded. This expenditure cannot be included within the figures for the individual health bodies as they are not included in commissioner accounts.
Sources:
HA audited accounts 1996–97 and 1997–98.
HA audited summarisation forms 1998–99 to 2001–02.
SHA audited summarisation forms 2002–03 and 2003–04.
PCT audited summarisation schedules 2000–01 to 2003–04.
Weighted population figures 1996–97 to 2003–04.





 
21 Feb 2005 : Column 314W
 

Health Funding (Chorley)

Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will adjust the funding allocations to Chorley to take account of the increased number of residents. [216826]

Mr. Hutton: Revenue allocations made to primary care trusts for 2003–04 to 2005–06 were announced on 11 December 2002. These allocations were based on the best available populations data. There are no plans to revisit these allocations.

Revenue allocations for 2006–07 and 2007–08 were announced on 9 February 2005. These allocations are based on population projections, which include an adjustment for expected increases in populations.

Health Promotion

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what measures have been put in place by the Government to tackle (a) cardiovascular disease and (b) diabetes in the South Asian population in England. [213895]

Ms Rosie Winterton: Both the national service framework (NSF) for coronary heart disease (CHD) and the national service framework for diabetes have set out modern standards and service models for the national health service for the prevention and treatment of these conditions. Both frameworks highlight the need to pay close attention to the needs of groups which are particularly vulnerable to CHD and diabetes, including South Asians.

To support this work, the Department produced a best practice guide for providing CHD services to South Asians last year. The guide includes a chapter on diabetes, which describes the NSF and provides some case studies of good practice. The guide aims to support service providers, including strategic health authorities
 
21 Feb 2005 : Column 315W
 
(SHAs), primary care trusts (PCTs), hospitals and other organisations working with South Asian communities to deliver heart disease services to South Asian people.

The toolkit is entitled, Heart Disease and South Asians, and was published by the South Asian Health Foundation in conjunction with the Department and the British Heart Foundation. A copy has been placed in the Library.

In addition, the United Kingdom National Screening Committee (NSC) has been asked to advise the Department by the end of 2005 on policy for screening for Type 2 diabetes. The NSC will advise on whether general population screening for diabetes is necessary, or alternatively that screening should be offered to specific sub-groups of the population who are at high risk for diabetes, such as some ethnic minority groups.

---