|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
20 Mar 2007 : Column 853Wcontinued
Mr. Wills: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate she has made of the cost to her Department of monitoring the time spent processing requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for the purposes of the proposed fees regulations. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend, the Parliamentary Secretary for Constitutional Affairs (Vera Baird) on 22 February 2007, Official Report, column 866W.
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what her Department's total expenditure on centrally funded (a) initiatives, (b) services and (c) special allocations was in each year since 1997-98; and what anticipated expenditure is in 2006-07; 
(2) what the (a) titles and (b) values are of the programmes which were transferred from her Department's central budget to the NHS budget in each year since 1997. 
Andy Burnham: Tables have been placed in the Library and they provide:
(a) listings of all allocations by budget title and value to national health service organisations from 1997-98 to 2005-06;
(b) total expenditure of the centrally funded, initiatives services and special allocations programme from 1997-98 to 2005-06;
(c) special allocations issued with initial allocations from 1997-98 to 2005-06; and
(d) special allocations and associated budgets issued to NHS organisations as additional allocations (and which are included in the tables described in (a) and (b) above).
There is no recognised division in the centrally funded initiatives services and special allocations programme between initiatives and services.
Full year 2006-07 information on centrally funded initiatives services and special allocations is not yet available, but the 2006-07 Departmental Report which has a provisional publication date of May 2007 will provide a breakdown of the main budget lines.
The tables correct the information given in answer to the hon. Member for the Vale of York (Miss McIntosh) on 5 March 2007, Official Report, column 1693W.
Mr. Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the (a) names and (b) job titles are of the officials within her Department who have responsibility for overseeing the delivery of dermatology services. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: The Department does not have any officials who solely focus on overseeing the delivery of dermatology services. Responsibility for general oversight of the delivery of the Departments public service agreement targets rests with the Departments recovery and support unit. The accountable Director-General is Mr. Duncan Selbie.
Mr. Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what guidance she issues to (a) GPs, (b) primary care trusts and (c) other health professionals on support for children and students with diabetes. 
Ms Rosie Winterton:
The national service frameworks (NSFs) for diabetes and for children, young people and maternity services were issued in 2001 and 2003-04 respectively. The diabetes NSF highlights the need to improve diabetes services for children and young people so that all children and young people with diabetes, their families and others
involved in the their day-to-day care are supported; to optimise the control of diabetes and to enhance their physical, psychological, intellectual, educational and social development.
The Department and the Department for Education and Skills issued the joint publication Managing Medicines in Schools and Early Years Settings in 2005. It recommends that schools, supported by their local authorities and local health professionals, develop policies on managing medicines and put in place effective management systems to support individual children with medical needs, including diabetes.
A report by the children and young people's diabetes services working group will be published shortly. This will act as an implementation support tool to enable the commissioning and evaluation of service delivery necessary to meet the commitments set out in the NSFs. It includes issues such as support in schools, transition from childrens to adults health services, structured education, psychological support, family support and monitoring for complications including retinal screening.
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will press the European Food Standards Agency (EFSA) to extend the maximum permitted derogation period under the food supplement directive for those supplements where EFSA has not completed its assessment of submitted evidence dossiers. 
Caroline Flint: The European Commission (EC) will be contacted shortly regarding the current deadline for European Food Standards Agency to have completed its assessment of dossiers submitted in accordance with the food supplements directive, and for decisions to have been taken by the EC Standing Committee for the addition of substances to the annexes in the food supplements directive, and for this deadline to be reviewed.
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much money was spent in Lancashire on anti-drug initiatives in each of the last 10 years. 
Caroline Flint: Information is not available on drug treatment spend prior to 2001 when the Department and the Home Office commenced the specific allocation for drug treatment in the form of the pooled drug treatment budget (PTB)
The table shows the PTB funding allocated to Lancashire in each year since 2002-03, when data were first available.
The following pooled drug treatment budgets were allocated to the Lancashire drug action team (DAT) for the years 2002-07.
|Pooled drug treatment budget allocation to Lancashire DAT (£000)|
Mr. Burrowes: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate of the numbers of problematic drug users and those accessing treatment formed the basis of the drug pooled treatment budget allocation for 2007-08 in Enfield; and what the latest estimate is following the research commissioned from the University of Glasgow produced in 2006. 
Caroline Flint: In previous years the pooled drug treatment budget (PTB) has been allocated using a formula based on an estimate of population need, linked to social and economic factors, known as the York formula. For 2007-08, the York formula continues to determine the majority of the PTB allocation formula. In 2007-08 the PTB indicative allocations also includes a small element of redistribution from those areas who currently receive a high level of Government contribution to the cost of treatment per person treated, to areas where the contribution is significantly lower. Nationally, this will mean a distribution of funding that is flatter per person treated than has previously been the case. For Enfield, the projected number of individuals in drug treatment in 2006-07 is 604. These figures are based on April to December data from the national drug treatment monitoring system.
The Government contribution per person treated in Enfield in 2006-07 was the second highest in England at £4,191. The contribution per person treated in 2007-08 will be £3,954, compared with the national average of £2,300 and the London average of £2,582.
The latest estimate for problematic drug users in Enfield, from the University of Glasgow data is £1,409. This figure is for problematic users of heroin and crack cocaine only and was not used in the calculations for the 2007-08 PTB.
Mr. Clegg: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people underwent drug detoxification within NHS (a) run and (b) funded facilities in each of the last five years. 
Caroline Flint: The national drug treatment monitoring system (NDTMS) records the number of individuals in national health service funded treatment in England. During 2004-05, since when this data has been available, there were 5,472 instances of in-patient detoxification reported to NDTMS and during 2005-06 there were 6,461. It is not possible to distinguish NHS run and non-statutory in-patient detoxification services.
Under-reporting of data to NDTMS is significant for in-patient treatment.
Over half of drug detoxification takes place on general medical or psychiatric wards, which do not contribute data to NDTMS.
Mr. Waterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what funding has been allocated to Eastbourne district general hospital for burns care services in 2007-08. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: Eastbourne district hospital is not a provider of specialised burn care services and therefore there are no plans to allocate any central monies for burn care to this hospital in 2007-08.
The Queen Victoria hospital in East Grinstead acts as the provider of specialised burn care services in the NHS south-east coast region.
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps she plans to take over the next two years to tackle eating disorders. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: We take the issue of eating disorders, especially among young people, very seriously. This is why the Department asked the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to produce a clinical guideline on the core interventions in the treatment and management of anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa and related eating disorders, which NICE published in 2004. The guideline covers physical and psychological treatments, treatment with medicines, and information specifically for patients, carers and the general public. The guideline is due for review in January 2008.
In the four years to the end of March 2007, we will have invested over £400 million of additional money into the child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) provided by the national health service and local authorities. These funds will assist in meeting and maintaining the Departments public service agreement (PSA) standard of a comprehensive CAMHS, including services for young people with an eating disorder. Further funds totalling £134 million have been made available to the NHS and local authorities in 2006-07 to help achieve a comprehensive CAMHS in every area by the end of 2006 and ensure that it is maintained thereafter.
As primary care trusts (PCTs) consider local health needs and commissioned services, they will need to assess whether the right balance exists between in-patient care and home-based care, particularly at a highly specialised levels, to help individuals with eating disorders. This means that PCTs will need to consider their commissioning role, where they work with local organisations and opportunities exist to commission services jointlyfor example, where voluntary organisations can provide services more effectively than statutory services.
We made a manifesto commitment in 2005 to increase the provision of psychological therapies. This followed 2001 Department guidelines on treatment choice in psychological therapies which included eating disorders, and 2004 guidance, Organising and Delivering Psychological Therapies, to help local services to understand best practice and how to organise local services to support access. Last year we embarked on a new programme, Improving Access to Psychological Therapies, (IAPT), to provide more effective and timely access to psychological
therapies for people with mild to moderate mental health problems, such as anxiety and depression. IAPTs two national demonstration sites in Newham and Doncaster, and a national programme of regional projects, will complete their work by March 2008 but interim results are showing positive gains in health and wellbeing in many of the 3,500 people already referred to the service.
Between 2004 and 2009, the Department is also funding a five-year initiative, Shift, to tackle the stigma and discrimination surrounding mental health issues in England. Shift works with young people and professionals to promote awareness of all mental health problems, including eating disorders.
We fund several voluntary sector organisations involved with eating disorders, including Weight Concern and beat, formerly the Eating Disorder Association for whom we are funding a three-year pathways to recovery project, which provides a support network of people who have had eating disorders. This project, which began in June 2006, will receive £131,000 over its three-year duration. The Department is also considering whether we can undertake further research into eating disorders through the National Institute for Health Research, about which I hope to make an announcement in the near future.
Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the effect of closure of specialist family planning clinics on the availability to general practitioners of training in contraceptive services. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: Funding arrangements are a matter for primary care trusts who must be free to prioritise their local funding according to local needs. The Government do however acknowledge the key role specialist contraception services play in providing training to other contraceptive providers and in particular the role they play in supporting general practice. We recognise the need to increase the numbers of sexual and reproductive health consultants and the Department is working closely with the Faculty of Family Planning and Reproductive Healthcare to ensure workforce capacity is available for the future.
Mr. Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which patient and public interest groups responded to the Good Doctors, Safer Patients public consultation. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on 5 March 2007, Official Report, column 1686W, to the hon. Member for North-West Leicestershire (David Taylor).
Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether she has carried out a race equality impact assessment of the reductions in budgets for 2007-08 for (a) South London and Maudsley NHS Trust, (b) Southwark Primary Care Trust and (c) Lambeth Primary Care Trust. 
Andy Burnham [holding answer 19 March 2007]: Strategic health authorities (SHAs) should work in partnership with their primary care trusts and local health providers to determine how best to use the funds allocated, to meet national and local priorities for improving health, to tackle health inequalities and modernise services. It is for local national health service bodies to assess the effect of their decisions, including their effect on particular parts of their local population.
All NHS organisations are currently in the process of finalising their financial plans for 2007-08. We have made clear in the 2007-08 NHS operating framework that SHAs will not generally require the scale of contribution to SHA reserves seen in 2006-07 because of the return of the NHS to overall financial balance this year.
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many NHS staff in Lancashire have received training in communication with children. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: The information requested is not held centrally.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate she has made of the amount the NHS will pay to private healthcare providers in (a) 2007-08 and (b) 2012-13. 
Andy Burnham: National health service spend on private healthcare providers will be determined by the choices made by patients and those who commission services locally on their behalf.
As the NHS financial planning process for 2007-08 is not yet complete, it is not yet possible to provide an estimate of this category of expenditure. Funding for the NHS beyond 2007-08 has not yet been agreed with HM Treasury.
Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will assess the applicability of European competition law to (a) the future configuration of clinical services provided by private sector contractors and (b) capacity of her Department to intervene in support of such services. 
Andy Burnham [holding answer 19 March 2007]: We do not believe it would be appropriate for the Department to conduct such an assessment. Whether and if European Union competition law applies to the configuration of clinical services provided by private sector contractors is a matter for the EU authorities.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|