13 July 2006 : Column 2070W—continued
| Table 1: 2004-05 audited year-end financial position for the 28 strategic health authorities (SHAs) and the surplus/deficit as a percentage of the cumulative SHA turnover |
| Name | Final turnover (£000) | Final surplus/(deficits) (£000) | Surplus/deficits as a percentage of turnover |
|
Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire SHA
|
2,510,547
|
(7,865)
|
(0.3)
|
|
Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire SHA
|
1,747,876
|
(61,020)
|
(3.5)
|
|
Birmingham and The Black Country SHA
|
2,958,369
|
13,974
|
0.5
|
|
Cheshire and Merseyside SHA
|
3,189,327
|
6,058
|
0.2
|
|
County Durham and Tees Valley SHA
|
1,532,417
|
559
|
0.0
|
|
Cumbria and Lancashire SHA
|
2,412,040
|
10,701
|
0.4
|
|
Dorset and Somerset SHA
|
1,380,346
|
6,370
|
0.5
|
|
Essex SHA
|
1,775,515
|
(13,982)
|
(0.8)
|
|
Greater Manchester SHA
|
3,435,822
|
30,035
|
0.9
|
13 July 2006 : Column 2071W
13 July 2006 : Column 2072W
|
Hampshire and Isle of Wight SHA
|
2,029,024
|
(39,539)
|
(1.9)
|
|
Kent and Medway SHA
|
1,797,559
|
(2,220)
|
(0.1)
|
|
Leicestershire, Northants and Rutland SHA
|
1,643,459
|
(1,562)
|
(0.1)
|
|
Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire SHA
|
2,484,186
|
(69,467)
|
(2.8)
|
|
North and East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire SHA
|
1,849,196
|
(8,439)
|
(0.5)
|
|
North Central London SHA
|
1,919,261
|
3,065
|
0.2
|
|
North East London SHA
|
2,203,934
|
7,457
|
0.3
|
|
North West London SHA
|
2,612,531
|
(72,112)
|
(2.8)
|
|
Northumberland, Tyne and Wear SHA
|
1,882,044
|
21,015
|
1.1
|
|
Shropshire and Staffordshire SHA
|
1,651,090
|
(22,724)
|
(1.4)
|
|
South East London SHA
|
2,270,265
|
(510)
|
(0.0)
|
|
South West London SHA
|
1,677,911
|
(20,085)
|
(1.2)
|
|
South West Peninsula SHA
|
1,906,104
|
(11,474)
|
(0.6)
|
|
South Yorkshire SHA
|
1,813,618
|
16,133
|
0.9
|
|
Surrey and Sussex SHA
|
3,027,235
|
(33,177)
|
(1.1)
|
|
Thames Valley SHA
|
2,291,031
|
(5,936)
|
(0.3)
|
|
Trent SHA
|
3,077,009
|
16,350
|
0.5
|
|
West Midlands South SHA
|
1,709,401
|
(9,836)
|
(0.6)
|
|
West Yorkshire SHA
|
2,714,636
|
26,873
|
1.0
|
| Table 2: 2005-06 provisional outturn position for the 28 SHAs and the surplus/deficit position as a percentage of the cumulative SHA turnover |
| Name | Final turnover (£000) | Final surplus/(deficits) (£000) | Surplus/deficits as a percentage of turnover |
|
Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire SHA
|
2,727,990
|
(41,514)
|
(1.5)
|
|
Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire SHA
|
1,830,995
|
(107,873)
|
(5.9)
|
|
Birmingham and The Black Country SHA
|
3,274,274
|
19,056
|
0.6
|
|
Cheshire and Merseyside SHA
|
3,482,704
|
(16,582)
|
(0.5)
|
|
County Durham and Tees Valley SHA
|
1,681,017
|
8
|
0.0
|
|
Cumbria and Lancashire SHA
|
2,583,471
|
34,100
|
1.3
|
|
Dorset and Somerset SHA
|
1,506,773
|
10,953
|
0.7
|
|
Essex SHA
|
1,934,727
|
(6,024)
|
(0.3)
|
|
Greater Manchester SHA
|
3,760,596
|
40,136
|
1.1
|
|
Hampshire and Isle of Wight SHA
|
2,194,508
|
(24,970)
|
(1.1)
|
|
Kent and Medway SHA
|
1,946,904
|
(4,195)
|
(0.2)
|
|
Leicestershire, Northants and Rutland SHA
|
1,799,477
|
(27,892)
|
(1.6)
|
|
Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire SHA
|
2,669,045
|
(100,405)
|
(3.8)
|
|
North and East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire SHA
|
2,021,208
|
(39,650)
|
(2.0)
|
|
North Central London SHA
|
2,050,552
|
6,863
|
0.3
|
|
North East London SHA
|
2,427,316
|
1,444
|
0.1
|
|
North West London SHA
|
2,728,757
|
(83,826)
|
(3.1)
|
|
Northumberland, Tyne and Wear SHA
|
2,055,500
|
19,695
|
1.0
|
|
Shropshire and Staffordshire SHA
|
1,789,877
|
(36,481)
|
(2.0)
|
|
South East London SHA
|
2,435,308
|
(48,376)
|
(2.0)
|
|
South West London SHA
|
1,772,740
|
(44,499)
|
(2.5)
|
|
South West Peninsula SHA
|
2,118,810
|
(18,303)
|
(0.9)
|
|
South Yorkshire SHA
|
1,980,107
|
36,664
|
1.9
|
|
Surrey and Sussex SHA
|
3,213,556
|
(85,007)
|
(2.6)
|
|
Thames Valley SHA
|
2,411,780
|
(32,834)
|
(1.4)
|
|
Trent SHA
|
3,372,327
|
16,665
|
0.5
|
|
West Midlands South SHA
|
1,893,734
|
(18,620)
|
(1.0)
|
|
West Yorkshire SHA
|
2,976,363
|
39,378
|
1.3
|
13 July 2006 : Column 2073W
Chris Huhne:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment her Department has made of the impact of NHS trust deficits on (a) rural and (b) non-rural areas; and if she will make a statement. [84625]
Andy Burnham:
Our analysis of the 2005-06 financial positions of national health service organisations has shown that there is no strong relationship between financial performance and any single factor, including the extent to which areas are urban or rural.
A full report on 2005-06 NHS financial performance is available in the Library.
Daniel Kawczynski:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether she has made an assessment of the differences in NHS trust deficits between English and Welsh local health boards. [80936]
Andy Burnham:
We have analysed the financial position of the national health service in England, and the results of that analysis is available in both Library and on the Department’s website. NHS deficits in Welsh trusts are a matter for the Welsh Assembly.
Daniel Kawczynski:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what provision she makes for the rurality of NHS trusts when allocating funding. [80945]
Andy Burnham:
Funding is allocated to primary care trusts on the basis of the relative needs of their populations. A weighted capitation formula is used to determine each primary care trusts target share of available resources. The weighted capitation formula is continuously overseen by the advisory committee on resource allocation (ACRA). This is an independent body, which has national health service management, general practitioner and academic members.
The formula that informed allocations up to 2007-08 takes account of access to services in rural areas, and the cost of providing emergency ambulance services. The ACRA work programme for the allocations for 2008-09 and beyond includes further consideration of rurality issues.
