| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
8 Mar 2007 : Column 2204W—continued
NHS: Waiting Lists
Mr. Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 27 February 2007, Official Report, column 1296-7W, on NHS waiting lists, which waiting times for episodes of NHS care measured by her Department which are not subject to a target. [126028]
Andy Burnham: Information is reported quarterly by national health service trusts, for emergency admissions via accident and emergency departments. On the number of patients who are placed in a bed on a ward within two hours of a decision to admit, within four hours of a decision to admit and those who not placed on a bed in a ward within four hours of a decision to admit.
Patients
Roger Berry: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what role dispensing appliance contractors play in supporting people with long-term conditions to self-care. [122529]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The expertise and support provided by all health professionals is important in enabling and empowering patients to adopt self-care strategies. We recognise that many people with long-term conditions value the additional services that dispensing appliance contractors provide over and above dispensing. These include home delivery services, organising home visits by specialist nurses and customising their products to match individual needs.
Primary Care Trusts: Yorkshire and Humberside
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent representations she has received on the financial position of the primary care trust in North Yorkshire. [119855]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: Recent representations received on the financial position of the primary care trust in North Yorkshire include:
A meeting on 29 January with the hon. member for City of York (Hugh Bayley).
One oral question from the hon. Member for City of York on 9 January, including interventions from other hon. Members.
Four written parliamentary questions since October 2006.
A small number of letters from both hon. Members and members of the public.
Resource Allocation
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to her speech on 16 November 2006, Official Report, column 152, on Health and Education, what methodology she used to calculate the stated figures that residents of the city of Cambridge would receive £205 per unweighted head less under a system of resource allocation based on the burden of disease, and that residents of Leicester would receive £305 more; what the revenue allocation would be for each primary care trust in England by this methodology; and whether calculations of morbidity are included in the methodology. [106107]
Andy Burnham: The figures are based on one way to calculate changes to the current national health service funding formula to reflect the burden of disease. This methodology includes premature mortality rates of cancer, coronary heart disease and stroke, and prevalence of diabetes.
The allocation for each primary care trust in England using this methodology has been placed in the Library.
Revascularisation
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what criteria her Department is using to decide which of the national projected revascularisation rate scenario models will be used within the NHS to achieve an appropriate rate by 2015; [123125]
(2) pursuant to the answer of 23 January 2007, Official Report, column 1756W, on revascularisation, what assessment she has made of the likelihood of each scenario; on what criteria she bases this judgement; and when she expects to take a final decision on which scenario is used for planning purposes. [123486]
Ms Rosie Winterton: The rate of clinical change in this area is fast and techniques may well be transformed over the period to 2015, as they have over the last 10 years.
A number of different scenarios were used when the Department conducted a cardiac stock-take to review capacity issues in different parts of London and the south-east. They were not developed to be prescriptive about the intervention rates that should or would occur.
Written Questions: Administrative Delays
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she will answer question 113817, on public sector pensions, tabled on 5 January 2007. [120263]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: A reply was given on 5 February 2007, Official Report, column 725W.
Treasury
Aggregates Levy (General) Regulations 2002
Tony Baldry: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the (a) one-off and (b) recurring costs of implementing the Aggregates Levy (General) Regulations 2002 to (i) businesses and (ii) the regulators. [125600]
John Healey: A full regulatory impact assessment was published in respect of the aggregates levy in March 2000, alongside the Budget. This is available on the HM Revenue and Customs website.
Aggregates levy receipts are returned to business, principally through a 0.1 percentage point reduction in employers’ national insurance contributions, which was introduced simultaneously with the levy in April 2002.
Alcoholic Drinks: Misuse
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many alcohol-related deaths in hospitals in Lancashire there were in each of the last 10 years. [125172]
John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
Letter from Colin Mowl, dated 8 March 2007:
The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent question asking how many alcohol-related deaths in hospitals in Lancashire there were in each of the last 10 years. I am replying in her absence. (125172)
We have interpreted your question as referring to all alcohol-related deaths to residents of Lancashire, whatever the place of death. The attached table provides the number of deaths with an alcohol-related underlying cause in Lancashire county, from 1996 to 2005 (the latest year available).
So that comparison over time is for a consistent area, deaths in the current Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen unitary authorities, which were part of the former County of Lancashire, have not been included for any year.
| Table 1: number of deaths with an alcohol-related underlying cause of death( 1) , Lancashire county( 2) , 1996 to 2005( 3) | |
| Deaths (persons) | |
| Number | |
| (1) Cause of death was defined using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) for the years 1996 to 2000, and Tenth Revision (ICD-10) for 2001 onwards. The specific causes of death categorised as alcohol-related, and their corresponding ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes, are shown in the boxes. The introduction of ICD-10 in 2001 means that the numbers of deaths from this cause before 2001 are not completely comparable with later years. (2) Based on the boundaries of Lancashire county as of 2007. Deaths in Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen unitary authorities are not included for any year. (3) Figures are for deaths registered in each calendar year. | |
| Box 1. alcohol-related causes of death—International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) | |
| Cause of death | ICD-9 code(s) |
|
Unspecified chronic liver disease without mention of alcohol | |
| Box 2: alcohol-related causes of death—International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) | |
| Cause of death | ICD-10 code(s) |
Charitable Donations
Mr. Heald: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate the Office for National Statistics has made of the proportion of the population who gave money to charity in (a) 1996-97 and (b) the most recent year for which figures are available. [125730]
John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated 8 March 2007:
As National Statistician I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking what estimate the Office for National Statistics (ONS) has made of the proportion of the population who gave money to charity in (a) 1996-97 and (b) the most recent year for which figures are available. (125730).
Estimates of the proportion of households (rather than individuals) who gave money to charity can be produced from the Expenditure and Food Survey (EFS), which is a sample survey covering approximately 7,000 households in the UK. In 2005/06 the proportion of households making charitable donations was 28 per cent, which compared to 31 per cent in 1996/97. These estimates are likely to be affected by a degree of under-reporting due to imperfect recall of survey respondents.
The ONS’ Omnibus Survey also asked respondents about charitable giving; the questions were included in the survey specifically for the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO), and the results appear in the NCVO publication ‘The UK Voluntary Sector Almanac 2006’. This publication contains more detailed analysis of charitable giving by individuals, although figures are available for 2004/05 only.
Figures from this publication suggest that the estimates from the EFS understate the true extent of charitable giving. The NCVO reports that charities' financial accounts show total donations received from individuals of around £4 billion in 2004/05, whereas the estimate of donations based on the EFS in that year, was £2.9 billion. The estimates of charitable giving produced by the NCVO from the Omnibus Survey data, are actually higher than would be implied by the charities’ financial accounts. It reports that 57% of adults gave to charity in a typical month during 2004/05, and that total donations for the year amounted to £8.2 billion. The NCVO report discusses some of the reasons why their estimates are higher. They may include an element of ‘purchase giving’—the purchase of goods or services from charities, that is still regarded by the respondent as charitable giving. In addition, whereas the EFS collects information on charitable giving merely as one component of expenditure amongst many, the Omnibus Survey questions addressed charitable giving much more directly, and the social desirability of charitable giving may have lead respondents to over-report the size and number of gifts.
Company Finance
Mr. Binley: To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer what the information obtained in the Annual Business Inquiry (Part 2) for 2006 Financial Questionnaire issued by the National Statistics is used for; and whether completing this form is compulsory. [125599]
John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated 8 March 2007:
As National Statistician I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking what the information obtained in the Annual Business Inquiry (Part 2) for 2006 Financial Questionnaire is used for; and whether completing this form is compulsory. (125599)
The Annual Business Inquiry—Financial Questionnaire (ABI/2) is designed to meet the government’s need for the production of national accounts and is used to compile input/output tables, which form the framework essential for understanding and analysing the interdependence of industries in the United Kingdom. It is also the main source of figures to meet the requirements of the European Structural Business Statistics (SBS) Regulation.
The statistics produced from the inquiry are used widely in managing the UK economy. Users of the statistics include: the Treasury; the Bank of England; the Department of Trade and Industry; the Scottish Executive; the Department for Enterprise, Trade and Investment in Northern Ireland (DETINI) and the Welsh Assembly.
Statistics are also used by the United Nations, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), local government authorities, and many private researchers and academics.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |