| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
20 Mar 2006 : Column 169W—continued
NHS Tariff Uplift
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 8 February 2006, Official Report, column 1322W, on the NHS Tariff Uplift, for what reasons the tariff uplift of 4 per cent. between 2005–06 and 2006–07 given in the Answer differs from the statement in paragraph 5.2, page 18 of her Department's document of 26 January 2006, The NHS in England: the operating framework in 2006–07, that the overall weighted increase across the full tariff in 2006–07 is 1.5 per cent. [57533]
Mr. Byrne [holding answer 10 March 2006.]: Paragraph 34 of 'Implemention Payments by Results: Technical Guidance 2006–07; Executive Summary', published on January 26 2006 and available on the Department's website at www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/12/73/76/04127376.pdf, explains the difference between the 4.0 per cent. tariff uplift and 1.5 per cent. increase in the overall weighted value of the tariff between 2005–06 and 2006–07. Copies of this document are available in the Library.
NICE Appraisals
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence's technology appraisal on drug misuse will take into account the potential impact on the budgets of (a) the police and (b) other crime prevention and enforcement agencies. [57662]
Jane Kennedy:
The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE)'s technology appraisals of naltrexone as a treatment for relapse prevention for drug misusers and methadone and buprenorphine for
20 Mar 2006 : Column 170W
the treatment of opiate drug misuse will consider the potential impact on the national health service and the personal social services budgets. In addition work is being undertaken to ensure that NICE's independent advisory committee is aware of wider societal costs when making its recommendations.
John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Health who authorised the signing of the contract between the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) and Southampton Technology Assessment Centre (SHTAC) that provides that the cost-effectiveness model prepared by SHTAC for NICE for consideration in the technology appraisal of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease cannot be disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000; and if she will make a statement. [58641]
Jane Kennedy: The contract, with the University of Southampton, for technology assessment review reports was authorised by the Department's director of research and development (R&D) and signed by an official on behalf of the Secretary of State for Health. It is a standard Departmental R&D contract, which invests intellectual property with the research contractor. Details of the relevant intellectual property policy is available on the Department's website at: www.dh.gov.uk/PolicyAndGuidance/ResearchAndDevelopment.
Nurses (Lancashire)
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many nurses per 100 beds there have been in each hospital in Lancashire in each year since 1997. [58597]
Mr. Byrne [holding answer 14 March 2006]: The information requested is shown in the table.
Notes:
1. Beds data are averaged over the period 1 April to 31 March
2. East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust was comprised of Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Health Care and Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust from 1997 to 2003
3. Blackpool, Fylde and Wyre Hospitals NHS Trust was comprised of Blackpool Wyre and Fylde Community Health Services and Blackpool Victoria from 1997 to 2002
4. Morecambe Bay Hospitals NHS Trust was comprised of Furness Hospitals NHS Trust, Westmorland Hospital NHS Trust and Lancaster Acute Hospitals NHS Trust in 1997
Source:
Department of Health form KH03 and NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre Non-Medical Workforce Census
20 Mar 2006 : Column 171W
Nursing Services
Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many cases have been brought against the national health service for failure to provide free nursing services in the last five years; and what the outcome of each was. [59151]
Mr. Byrne [holding answer 16 March 2006]: Information regarding the number of applications for review of national health care continuing health care cases, or the outcomes of individual cases are not held centrally.
Orthodontics
Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps she is taking to improve orthodontic treatment provision in Shropshire. [51919]
Ms Rosie Winterton: The Department published guidance on 17 February 2006. This guidance Factsheet 11—Orthodontic new PDS agreements and new GDS contracts" can be found on the Department's website at: www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/13/03/20/04130320.pdf.
This guideline takes into account discussions with the British Orthodontic Society and encompasses the new arrangements for orthodontic acre and treatment.
Osteomalacia/Osteoporosis
Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the incidence of (a) osteomalacia and (b) osteoporosis was in the UK in each of the last five years; and what the annual expenditure on the treatment of osteomalacia and osteoporosis was in each year. [37135]
Mr. Byrne: Table 1 shows the incidence of osteomalacia and osteoporosis from 2000–01 to 2004–05.
Source:
Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre.
We do not hold data which link treatment to disease and therefore cannot say how much was spent on treating a specific disease. The drugs used to treat osteomalacia and osteoporosis are also used to treat other disease. We are unable to provide a breakdown of the expenditure by the disease it was used to treat.
20 Mar 2006 : Column 172W
The amount spent in each of the last five years are shown in table 2.
| Cost (£ million) | |
|---|---|
| 2000 | 1.99 |
| 2001 | 2.43 |
| 2002 | 2.36 |
| 2003 | 2.40 |
| 2004 | 2.48 |
Parliamentary Questions
Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she will answer question number 38287 tabled on 13 December by the hon. Member for Romsey. [54223]
Jane Kennedy: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 6 March 2006, Official Report, column 1204W.
PCT Finances
Mr. Kenneth Clarke: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what her policy is on the practice of primary care trusts (PCTs) in financial deficit borrowing money from other PCTs in financial surplus with a commitment to repayment in future years; what guidance she has issued to PCTs on this; and whether she has specified appropriate levels of interest. [57897]
Jane Kennedy [holding answer 13 March 2006]: Strategic health authorities (SHAs) are responsible for the financial management of the organisations within their area and for delivering overall financial balance across the SHA. Where a primary care trust (PCT) is overspending the SHA can agree to provide the organisation additional resources in the form of repayable planned support. The support should be agreed during the annual planning stage and should only be provided to overspending organisations on the basis that they deliver a plan to recover their financial position over an agreed period.
SHA have discretion in how they operate the system of planned support. The Department does not specify whether they should charge or pay interest to PCT. In addition, since the SHA can only provide additional resources to an overspending organisation where another organisation underspends, the system of planned support operates on the basis of local agreement.
In 2006–07, the Department has instructed SHAs that there should be no more provision of planned support. This will increase the transparency of the system because all overspending will be recorded in the annual accounts of the organisation. The Department has explained the system changes to SHAs in guidance for 2006–07 financial planning.
20 Mar 2006 : Column 173W
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |