|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Heathcoat-Amory: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 4 September 2006, Official Report, column 1718W, on surplus military equipment, what the locations are of the (a) six Buccaneers, (b) 44 Harriers, (c) 13 Hunters, (d) 35 Tornados and (e) 16 Phantoms sold since 1999. 
Mr. Heathcoat-Amory: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he maintains a register of non-governmental buyers of surplus military equipment to ensure that no such equipment is exported. 
Mr. Ingram: No such register is maintained. There are no general restrictions on the lawful export of surplus military equipment, although specific restrictions will apply in individual cases including the need for an export licence where applicable.
Mr. Ingram: Ministry of Defence policy is to ensure that, where appropriate, robust terms and conditions covering end-use are included in the contract of sale. End-user certificates are required in support of export licence applications made to the Department of Trade and Industry.
Mr. Heathcoat-Amory: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 4 September 2006, Official Report, column 1718W, on surplus military equipment, (1) what action was taken to de-militarise the Hunters sold at public auction; 
Mr. Ingram: Ministry of Defence policy is to ensure that all aircraft are declassified prior to sale, which includes the removal of all classified avionics and weapon systems. Records on demilitarisation of the Hunter aircraft are no longer held.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the value of UK (a) exports and (b) imports of (i) defence material and (ii) defence services to the US was in the last year for which figures are available. 
Mr. Ingram: The values of the physical exports of defence equipment from the UK to the USA are reported in the Annual Reports on the United Kingdom Strategic Export Controls. The figures are derived by HM Revenue and Customs according to an agreed set of tariff codes for Defence equipment. HM Revenue and Customs also produce figures for equipment imports to the UK from the USA. The figures for 2005 are provided in the following table:
We only have very limited and partial figures for imports and exports of defence services between the UK and USA produced as part of the Ministry of Defence Estimated Balance of Payments for Trade in Services. For 2005 these data show the value of services recorded under MOD Estimated Balance of Payments for imported services from USA was £456 million and the exported services was £252 million.
Mr. Vara: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 15 May 2006, Official Report, column 744W, on dentistry, how many dentists in North West Cambridgeshire have (a) signed and (b) not signed the new contract for NHS dentists; and how many of those who have (i) signed and (ii) not signed the new contract for NHS dentists provide orthodontic treatment. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: The following table shows the number of contracts reported as signed and not signed in Huntingdonshire and South Peterborough primary care trusts (PCTs). Information is not held centrally on which of these contracts if any included orthodontic activity.
|PCT||Number of contracts signed||Approximate UDA value||Number||Approximate units of dental activity (UDA) value||Percentage UDAs from rejected contracts|
Primary care trusts are using funding associated with rejected contracts to commission additional services from other dentists. As at 31 August 2006 Huntingdonshire has recommissioned 3,561 UDAs, South Peterborough has recommissioned 5,604 UDAs.
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what she estimates the average cost per resident was of free nursing care for older people in each of the last five years for which figures are available; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: Registered nursing care contributions have been payable for those in a care home providing nursing care who had previously paid for the care they needed from a registered nurse since October 2001 and, from April 2003 for all residents of care homes providing nursing care, including those placed by local authorities rather than that element of their care being provided by the local council and subject to a means test.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether her Department has made an assessment of the impact of health service closures on likely voter behaviour in marginal constituencies. 
Mr. Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many women in (a) Hartlepool constituency and (b) the Tees Valley sub-region gave birth via caesarean section in each of the last 10 years. 
|Number of finished consultant episodes of deliveries via caesarean section by trust. NHS Hospitals: England, 1995-96 to 2004-05|
|Trust||County Durham and Darlington Acute Hospital NHS Trust||North Durham Health Care and South Durham Health Care||North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust||South Tees Hospitals NHS Trust|
| Notes: 1. RXP was set up in 2002-03 by merging RR9 and RTA. Therefore figures for 2001-02 and earlier years up to 1998-99 are the total activity for RR9 and RTA. It is not possible to provide comparable data for RTR in years earlier than 2002-03 due to a complex merger that took place to set up RTR in 2002-03. RVW did not exist prior to 1999-2000. There is no data in the HES database for RVW for 2001-02. 2. Finished consultant episode (FCE). An FCE is defined as a period of admitted patient care under one consultant within one health care provider. Please note that the figures do not represent the number of patients, as a person may have more than one episode of care within the year. 3. Ungrossed data. Figures have not been adjusted for shortfalls in data (i.e. the data are ungrossed). 4. Delivery methods used: 7 = Elective caesarean section (caesarean section before or at the onset of labour) 8 = Emergency caesarean section. Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). The Information Centre for Health & Social Care|
Mr. Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many women from the top decile of deprived wards in (a) Hartlepool constituency and (b) the Tees Valley sub-region gave birth in each of the last five years. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The information requested is not available in the format requested. The table shows the number of patients who gave birth from the top 10 per cent. of deprived wards where residence was Hartlepool Primary Care Trust (PCT) or the former County Durham and Tees Valley Strategic Health Authority (SHA).
|Data for NHS hospitals England for 2000-01 to 2004-05|
|Data year||Hartlepool PCT||County Durham and Tees Valley SHA|
| Notes: 1. Ungrossed data Figures have not been adjusted for shortfalls in data (i.e., the data are ungrossed) 2. Patient Counts Patient counts are based on the unique patient identifier HESID. This identifier is derived based on patients date of birth, postcode, sex, local patient identifier and national health service number, using an agreed algorithm. Where data are incomplete, HESID might erroneously link episodes or fail to recognise episodes for the same patient. Care is therefore needed, especially where duplicate records persist in the data. The patient count cannot be summed across a table where patients may have episodes in more than one cell. 3. Hartlepool PCT was part of the former County Durham and Tees Valley SHA therefore figures in PCT will also be counted in the SHA figures. 4. Episode type = 2 and 5 (delivery episodes) was used to define those who gave birth. Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), The Information Centre for health and social care.|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|