|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will list the projects to reduce surplus places funded through the Targeted Capital Fund in each of the last three years; what the cost of each project was; and how many places were lost under each project. 
Derek Twigg [holding answer 28 February 2005]: In accordance with the Targeted Capital Fund programme, projects were accepted from local education authorities that included reductions in surplus places. Information on these projects, and the places lost per project, is not recorded centrally.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many times she has used the powers under schedule 7 of the Schools Standards and Framework Act 1998 to require local education authorities to bring forward plans to reduce the number of surplus places. 
Derek Twigg [holding answer 28 February 2005]: Local education authorities are responsible for balancing the supply of places in their area, to ensure schools serve the needs of their local communities and provide good quality education in the most cost effective way.
Mr. Cash: To ask the Solicitor-General what involvement (a) the Lord Chancellor and (b) Baroness Morgan had in preparation of the reply to the parliamentary question tabled by the hon. Member for Stone to the Prime Minister on 11 March 2003 on the legal basis for military intervention in Iraq to which the Attorney-General referred in evidence to the Butler Inquiry on 5 May 2004; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Solicitor-General where and in what buildings, the written statement made to Parliament on 17 March 2003 setting out the legal basis for the war in Iraq was prepared; and by whom. 
Mr. Tyrie: To ask the Solicitor-General (1) what discussions the Attorney-General had with respect to drafting the written answer of 17 March 2003, Official Report, House of Lords, column WA2; 
The Attorney-General's written answer of 17 March 2003, Official Report, column 515W, which I relayed to the House, was drawn
1 Mar 2005 : Column 1071W
up in the office of the Attorney-General. Those involved were the Attorney-General and myself, two officials in our office, three officials from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Christopher Greenwood QC. The draft was also discussed with the then Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine of Lairg. The Attorney-General was fully involved throughout the drafting process and personally finalised and approved the answer.
No other Minister or official was involved. In particular, neither Baroness Morgan of Huyton nor Lord Falconer of Thoroton, nor any official in the Prime Minister's office had any involvement whatever in the drafting of the answer. The Attorney-General has never said that they did so. As the Attorney-General has always made clear, he set out in the answer his own genuinely held, independent view that military action was lawful under the existing Security Council resolutions.
Mr. Hutton: The protection arrangements which apply under Agenda for Change to staff employed by national health service organisations have been agreed by the NHS Staff Council. These arrangements are set out in Section 46 of the NHS Terms and Conditions of Service Handbook, a copy of which is in the Library.
Ms Rosie Winterton: We have no plans to extend the existing list of medical conditions that give exemption from prescription charges. The list has been reviewed on a number of occasions but no clear cut case for extending it has emerged. There is no consensus on what additional conditions might be included in any revised list of medical exemptions, or how distinctions could be drawn between one condition and another.
Government policy is to help those who may have difficulty paying charges. The current exemption and charge remission arrangements are intended to ensure that
1 Mar 2005 : Column 1072W
no one need be deterred from obtaining any necessary medication on financial grounds. Consequently, 86 per cent., of prescriptions are dispensed free of charge.
Mr. Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many full-time equivalent consultants were employed in the NHS on the latest date for which figures are available; how many were employed in 1997; and if he will make a statement. 
|England(10)||Whole time equivalents|
The number of whole-time equivalent consultants working in the National Health Service increased by 7,979 or 41 per cent., between September 1997 and June 2004. The number of specialist registrars has also increased significantly over recent years and these doctors will become the consultants of the future.
Mr. Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1)how much has been paid to date by his Department to individuals or their families where it has been found that they were inappropriately charged for NHS continuing care since 1996; 
(2) pursuant to the answer of 24 January to the hon. Member for West Chelmsford to question reference 210193, if he will list by each strategic health authority (SHA) the number of complaints each SHA has investigated on allegations of individuals being inappropriately denied funding for continuing care at (a) December 2003, (b) March 2004 and (c) July 2004; and if he will list in each case (i) the number and percentage of completed investigations and (ii) the number of cases eligible for payment as of July 2004. 
With regard to the number of complaints investigated, I refer the hon. Member to the statement Imade to the House on 16 September 2004, Official Report, column 175WS. That statement provides the latest available statistics, including the most up to date information on the numbers of cases eligible for payment. Further to this information, the table shows details of the number of requests for retrospective funding investigations received between 31 March and 31 July 2004 and the total number of retrospective cases completed by the 31 July 2004.
1 Mar 2005 : Column 1073W
Strategic health authority name
|Number of requests for retrospective funding investigations between 31 March and 31 July||Total number of retrospective funding investigations completed by 31 July|
|Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire||110||608|
|Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire||30||132|
|North West London||17||209|
|North Central London||46||101|
|North East London||23||169|
|South East London||36||246|
|South West London||25||182|
|Northumberland, Tyne and Wear||35||202|
|County Durham and Tees Valley||23||223|
|North and East Yorkshire and North Lincs||46||302|
|Cumbria and Lancashire||75||419|
|Cheshire and Merseyside||103||651|
|Hampshire and Isle of Wight||74||544|
|Kent and Medway||65||280|
|Surrey and Sussex||137||555|
|Avon, Gloucestershire And Wiltshire||109||857|
|South West Peninsula||49||533|
|Dorset And Somerset||76||429|
|Leics, Northants and Rutland||31||245|
|Shropshire and Staffordshire||37||432|
|Birmingham and The Black Country||37||278|
|West Midlands South||41||275|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|