Previous Section Index Home Page

5 Jun 2007 : Column 434W—continued


John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the unit of dental activity payment fee is in each primary care trust in England. [138864]

Ms Rosie Winterton: Data collected by the Department centrally does not identify the value of units of dental activity in each primary care trust. UDA values will vary because of a number of factors, including differences in treatment patterns and treatment needs in different areas, the contract values negotiated locally by PCTs and dental practices, and the degree to which PCTs and practices may have agreed service outputs that cannot be measured through patient courses of treatment.

Mr. Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what target is set by her Department for the average number of units of dental activity per hour that a dentist is expected to achieve. [138897]

Ms Rosie Winterton: The Department has set no targets for the level of activity, hourly or otherwise, that a dentist is expected to achieve. Local contracts, agreed between primary care trusts and dental providers, specify the overall level of patient services to be delivered over a 12 month period. Annual service levels are expressed in terms of the number of courses of treatment provided to patients, with a weighting to reflect the relative complexity of different courses of treatment.

Dental Services: Funding

Dr. Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to her answer of 1 May 2007, Official Report, column 1596W, on dental service funding, how much dental service increment for teaching funding was allocated to the national dental workforce unit; what proportion of this funding was allocated to each National Health Service trust; and if she will make a statement. [138773]


5 Jun 2007 : Column 435W

Ms Rosie Winterton: The amount allocated to the national dental workforce unit to fund the dental service increment for teaching in 2006-07 was £76,736,869.

The amounts allocated to individual national health service trusts by the national dental workforce unit in 2006-07 are shown in the following table.

NHS trust Funding allocated by national dental workforce unit (£)

South Birmingham Primary Care Trust

8,478,548

United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust

6,077,412

Guy's and St Thomas1 NHS Foundation Trust

13,527,491

King's College Hospital NHS Trust

6,976,263

Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust

7,001,932

Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospital NHS Trust

7,062,039

Bart's and the London NHS Trust

8,019,465

Central Manchester and Manchester Children's University Hospital NHS Trust

5,766,793

Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

8,030,884

Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

6,609,435

Peninsula Dental School, Universities of Exeter and Plymouth

1,000,000

National Dental Workforce Unit administrative costs

220,000

Total

(1)78,770,262

(1) The total funding allocated by the National Dental Workforce Unit (NDWU) exceeded the 2006-07 allocation from the Department. The balance was funded by reserves that the NDWU had accumulated.

Dentistry: Taxation

Dr. Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions her Department has had with (a) HM Treasury and (b) HM Revenue and Customs on the tax and national insurance status of dentists. [139868]

Ms Rosie Winterton: The Department’s only recent discussions with HM Revenue and Customs were to clarify that the nature of the contracts to provide national health service dental services introduced from 1 April 2006 between primary dental care providers and primary care trusts would not affect the employment status of independent dental practitioners. Tax and national insurance issues for dentists who are not NHS salaried employees are a matter between the individual dentist and HMRC. The employment arrangements for dentists working within independent dental practices is a matter for the dental provider which employs or engages them.

Disabled Children (Family Support) Bill

Mr. Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make it her policy to support the Disabled Children (Family Support) Bill; and if she will make a statement. [117123]

Mr. Dhanda: I have been asked to reply.


5 Jun 2007 : Column 436W

The recent report from HM Treasury and the Department for Education and Skills “Aiming high for disabled children: better support for families” (May 2007) sets out the actions and proposals that the Government believe will make a real difference to all disabled children and their families. The actions and proposals are supported by a funding package of £340 million which is to be spent over the next Comprehensive spending review period.

A copy of the report can be downloaded from the Every Child Matters website:

Doctors: Training

Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many doctors were appointed to specialist registrar training posts in (a) 2005 and (b) 2006, broken down by deanery. [137203]

Ms Rosie Winterton: The information requested is not held centrally.

Drugs: Greater London

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate she has made of the number of people addicted to illegal drugs in each London borough. [138500]

Mr. Coaker: I have been asked to reply.

Estimates of the number of people addicted to all types of illegal drug are not available. However, estimates of the number of problem heroin and crack users in 2004-05 are available at the local and national level and the estimates for the London Drug Action Team areas are shown in the following table. These estimates cover individuals who use opiates (e.g. heroin or morphine) and/or crack cocaine, including all who ‘use’ as well as those that ‘misuse’ or ‘abuse’ these types of drugs, but a large proportion of them will be addicted. Estimates are for those aged 15 to 64.


5 Jun 2007 : Column 437W
Estimate of problem drug use among 15 to 64-year-olds (opiate and/or crack cocaine use) for London GOR based on data relating to 1 April 2004 to 31 March 2005
95 per cent. confidence interval
DAT area Estimate( 1) Lower limit Upper limit

Barking and Dagenham

871

684

1,168

Barnet

1,290

802

2,477

Bexley

593

447

907

Brent

2,621

1,853

5,379

Bromley

1,857

1,326

3,128

Camden

4,218

3,420

5,516

City of London

50

22

78

Croydon

3,096

2,240

4,723

Ealing

2,725

2,202

3,743

Enfield

1,409

675

2,142

Greenwich

1,751

1,395

2,280

Hackney

4,586

3,806

5,904

Hammersmith and Fulham

3,020

2,153

4,430

Haringey

2,485

1,965

3,235

Harrow

742

583

1,083

Havering

843

545

1,418

Hillingdon

918

695

1,302

Hounslow

1,838

1,399

2,675

Islington

4,667

3,638

6,675

Kensington and Chelsea

3,173

2,589

3,757

Kingston upon Thames

559

410

886

Lambeth

5,029

4,191

5,867

Lewisham

2,816

2,272

3,518

Merton

1,225

833

2,068

Newham

2,338

1,843

3,526

Redbridge

1,157

860

1,699

Richmond upon Thames

649

383

1,921

Southwark

4,836

3,988

6,043

Sutton

976

714

1,369

Tower Hamlets

3,640

3,083

4,395

Waltham Forest

1,814

1,206

2,422

Wandsworth

2,439

1,945

3,361

Westminster

4,186

3,358

5,014

London GOR

74,417

71,845

81,299

(1) As with all statistical estimates, these estimates contain an element of uncertainty. The 95 per cent. confidence interval shows the range within which the true estimate is likely to lie although it should be noted that the true estimate is most likely to be close to the best estimate shown in the table.

Next Section Index Home Page