---

PRIME MINISTER

The Prime Minister was asked—

Engagements

Q1. [56627] Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD): If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 8 March.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Tony Blair): This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I will have further such meetings later today.

Tim Farron: Homelessness in south Lakeland rose by 85 per cent. last year, and average local house prices are 15 times as high as average local incomes. Will the Prime Minister act swiftly to prevent the compulsory right to buy of shared ownership schemes, to ensure that more affordable homes can be built, and that they remain affordable?

The Prime Minister: That is precisely why we want to encourage more house building in areas where there is pressure on housing, especially for young couples trying to own their first home, and why we want to encourage shared equity schemes. As my right hon. Friends the Deputy Prime Minister and the Chancellor have said in recent weeks, it is therefore important that we continue with the programme, which means we invest in housing and increase its availability. However, we also need
 
8 Mar 2006 : Column 813
 
more imaginative ways to ensure that people, and especially young people, are able to own a home for the first time.

Mr. Tom Harris (Glasgow, South) (Lab): May I inform the Prime Minister that if he wants to get in touch with me for any reason over the next few weeks, I shall be on paid paternity leave for two weeks from around the beginning of June? [Hon. Members: "Hear, hear."] If he tries to phone me at home and I am not in, I shall probably be at the bank, cashing in a baby bond. What plans do the Government have to support new parents further, and does my right hon. Friend expect cross-party support for such measures this time?

The Prime Minister: I extend my warmest congratulations to my hon. Friend. The measures that we took in respect of paternity leave go alongside our massive extensions to maternity pay and maternity leave, and baby bonds. Like the children's tax credit, they are all examples of this Government's commitment to families and to balancing work and family life. I am only sorry that those measures were opposed in their entirety by the Opposition.

Mr. David Cameron (Witney) (Con): The outgoing chief executive of the NHS said last night that the service was going through a "bad patch". Does the Prime Minister agree?

The Prime Minister: It is very important that we get hospitals with financial deficits back into surplus. However, we must be clear about this matter, and a review of the past few years shows the difference that investment and reform have made. Under this Government, waiting lists have fallen by something like 400,000. Whereas almost 300,000 people used to wait 15 months for their operations in 1997, no one now waits more than six months.

Mr. Cameron: The fact is that the deficit has trebled, wards are being closed and, in my constituency, mental health consultants are being sacked. If everything is going so well, why did the Prime Minister have to sack the NHS chief executive?

The Prime Minister: Nigel Crisp gave his reasons for standing down in his statement yesterday, but let me say that he was a superb public servant who, in the past few years, has overseen a transformation of the health service. Moreover, we should get the question of deficits in context. The total deficit is less than 1 per cent. of the NHS annual bill, but the most important fact is that 50 per cent. of that deficit is in 6 per cent. of trusts. It is true that there is a substantial financial deficit in the right hon. Gentleman's area—[Interruption.] Yes, but there have also been massive real-terms increases in the amount of money going in—money that he voted against. That is why we have to have proper systems of financial transparency. We are putting in a huge investment, but it is for local hospital organisations to make sure that they balance the books. In fact, the majority of them are doing just that.

Mr. Cameron: The Prime Minister tries to fudge the issue of whether Sir Nigel was sacked, but last night
 
8 Mar 2006 : Column 814
 
Sir Nigel said that he had wanted to stay for at least another year, and that he wanted to leave when things were "on the up"—something with which I am sure that the Prime Minister feels some sympathy. He also said that the NHS's structural problems were getting worse, that managers were under less pressure to get the finances right, and that financial problems were now being revealed. What responsibility do Ministers take for such matters?

The Prime Minister: Ministers are responsible, but both Sir Nigel and Ministers can be extremely proud of the following achievements in the national health service—[Interruption.] I know that Opposition Members do not want to hear the fact that there are 80,000 more nurses in the national health service and 30,000 more doctors; that waiting for cataract operations is down from two years to three months; that now no one waits for heart operations for more than three months; that cancer deaths are down by 14 per cent., saving 43,000 lives; and that deaths from heart disease are down 30 per cent., saving 83,000 lives. Yes, of course there are problems in our national health service, like any health care system in the world, but if we compare today and the levels of not just funding but achievement with 1997, the issue for the national health service today, in part thanks to what Sir Nigel has done, is how we improve it, not what it used to be in 1997, which was whether we could save it.

Mr. Cameron: In public, the Prime Minister gives us these lists of success; in private, he knows that things are going wrong and is he sacking the chief executive. Is this not just the latest example of mismanagement in the NHS? The Government set up primary care trusts; now they are scrapping half of them. They introduced strategic health authorities; now most of them are going. They have poured money into the NHS, but there is an £800 million deficit and the outgoing chief executive said that things are getting worse, not better. When will Ministers take responsibility for their failures, instead of seeking to blame others?

The Prime Minister: Sir Nigel certainly did not say that the national health service is getting worse not better. The national health service, on any basis, as every independent report has shown, is indeed getting better. The reason why I read out the achievements of the past few years is because it used to be the case that literally hundreds of thousands of people waited more than a year on in-patient waiting lists; no one does today. It used to be the case that waiting lists went up every single year; they have fallen by almost 500,000 in the past five or six years. Just today, we are announcing at Barts the largest scheme that is going to mean fantastic opportunities for patients and clinicians throughout that part of London. Every penny piece was opposed by the right hon. Gentleman and the Conservative party. So, when he says that the national health service has challenges and issues, of course it does, but no one believes that the national health service is not better today than it was eight or nine years ago, and that is the result of not just investment and reform, but the fact that when he was still advocating the patient's passport to take money out of the NHS, this party stood by the NHS, stood by its values, stood by its principles and will make it better still.
 
8 Mar 2006 : Column 815
 

Gordon Banks (Ochil and South Perthshire) (Lab): Does my right hon. Friend agree that Monday's report by the Sustainable Development Commission highlights clearly that the way forward for the UK's energy demands is through an even greater expansion of renewables and not through a new range of nuclear generation facilities, in relation to which the Commission highlighted that there are waste, cost, security and inflexibility questions still to be answered?

The Prime Minister: I agree with my hon. Friend in part. The part that I agree with is that we certainly do need to make sure that renewable energy forms a larger part of our energy mix and that is what we are committed to. Over the past few years, we have seen an extension in the amount of renewable energy. We have very stringent targets for the expansion of renewable energy in the next few years. But I have to say to him that I still think that there is a major challenge—this is what the energy review will answer in the next few months—as to whether we can really make sure that we meet both our energy needs and our environmental targets without nuclear power in the mix. That is something that we will obviously have to consider over the next few months, but let me just make one thing clear: the Sustainable Development Commission asks whether nuclear power is the answer, but no one has ever said that it is the whole answer. The question is whether it is part of the answer, as part of a sensible and balanced energy mix.

Sir Menzies Campbell (North-East Fife) (LD): Following that answer, can the Prime Minister tell us why the Government have yet to implement many of the low carbon solutions suggested in the energy White Paper of 2003?

The Prime Minister: First, I should say congratulations to the right hon. and learned Gentleman.

We actually are doing many of those things that are low carbon solutions. For example, due to building regulations, even though there is now a debate about whether we should go further, energy efficiency has improved by something like 40 per cent. for new buildings. There is the renewable energy that I was just talking about a moment or two ago. There are all the issues to do with energy efficiency, where again the Government are investing a large sum of money. Our Government are investing about £600 million this year in various forms of clean technology. Of course there are tremendous challenges as our economy grows, but as the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, we will be one of the very few countries in the world to meet their Kyoto targets.

Sir Menzies Campbell: I thank the Prime Minister for his congratulations. He will know that there are increasing doubts about the Government's ability to meet the target of a 20 per cent. reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2010. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs says we must do so; the Department of Trade and Industry says we cannot. Who is right, and who is going to win?

The Prime Minister: In the next few months we will publish our proposals to make sure that we can attain that 20 per cent. target. However, the right hon. and
 
8 Mar 2006 : Column 816
 
learned Gentleman is right to say that it is incredibly challenging. Even though the economy has been growing far faster than the level of emissions, it will be highly challenging to meet that target. That should not diminish our pride as a country in having met our Kyoto targets, which were substantial, and in the leadership role that this country is playing round the world in tackling climate change. As he knows, in the end the single biggest thing that we can do, apart from giving leadership in the UK, is to make sure in international terms that America, China and India in particular are all working together.

---