|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Jamie Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (1) if her Department will take account of issues relating to severe and widespread subsidence in public areas caused by historic mine workings in the annual local authority budget allocation process; 
(2) whether public money is available for areas of historic iron ore mining or other non-coal mining areas on the same basis as that made available to historic coal mining areas; and if she will make a statement; 
(3) what representations her Department has received from (a) the relevant non-departmental public bodies and (b) Cumbria County Council on the subsidence issues caused by historic mineworkings in the town of Egremont; 
Mr. Iain Wright: The Government set the overall level of grant to local authorities in the spending review and will be considering all identified future pressures on local authorities, and the ways in which these can be mitigated, as part of the Comprehensive Spending Review 2007. However, primarily the route for assistance with funding for local authorities for subsidence caused by historic non-coal mine workings is through the Land Stabilisation Programme.
The Land Stabilisation Programme (LSP) can provide local authorities with help with funding for land instability works due to abandoned non-coal mines which are likely to collapse and therefore pose a problem to life and property. Local authorities in England are eligible to apply to English Partnerships, the non-departmental public body managing the programme on behalf of Communities and Local Government. Extensive guidance on the assistance
available, eligibility conditions and how to apply for funding can be found on the English Partnerships website at:
Cumbria county council approached English Partnerships in August 2005 to explore the possibility of LSP funding after the collapse of a mineshaft in June 2005 at Greenmoor Road, Egremont. Following a meeting with and receipt of information from the council, English Partnerships concluded that the mineshaft treatment proposals did not comply with the terms of reference of the LSP. English Partnerships wrote to the council in September 2005 advising that the proposed project was not eligible for LSP funding.
Andrew Mackinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the total cost of the Thurrock Development Corporation has been since it was constituted; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Iain Wright [holding answer 26 June 2007]: To date, Communities and Local Government has allocated the Thurrock Thames Gateway Development Corporation a capital budget of £63 million and its revenue spending amounts to a total of £36.5 million since 2003the inception of the Corporation.
Mr. Keith Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (1) whether she plans to use the powers contained in Part 1, Chapter 1 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill, if enacted, to invite district councils to submit revised proposals for unitary structures on the basis of administrative areas with boundaries which exceed existing district council boundaries; 
John Healey: We have no plans for further rounds of restructuring. However, the Bill provides for an invitation to councils to come forward with unitary proposals. There may, for example, be a case for inviting a council to make proposals where that might be necessary to make sense of a boundary change.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many abortions have been performed under the Abortion Act 1967, as amended by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990; and how many and what percentage were performed (a) to save the life of the mother and (b) where the child would have been seriously disabled. 
(1) For 2003 onwards, these data are suppressed for reasons of confidentiality as the presented value would reveal a total of less than 10 (0-9) when used with data already published. This is in line with the Office for National Statistics guidance on the disclosure of abortion statistics (2005).
(2) that the termination is immediately necessary to save the life or to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman.
(3) that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated.
(4) that there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.
Statistical Bulletin: Abortion Statistics, England and Wales: 2006
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many women seeking an abortion in England gave addresses in (a) Northern Ireland, (b) the Republic of Ireland, (c) Israel, (d) Malta and (e) Poland in 2006. 
Dawn Primarolo: In England and Wales, in 2006, there were 1,295 abortions for residents of Northern Ireland, 5,042 for residents of the Republic of Ireland, 55 for residents of Malta and 10 for residents of Poland. There were less than five abortions (between 0-4)(1) for residents of Israel.
(1) For confidentiality reasons, the actual number cannot be disclosed. This is line with the Office for National Statistics guidance on the disclosure of abortion statistics (2005).
Statistical Bulletin, Abortion Statistics, England and Wales: 2006
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which 10 primary care organisations had the (a) highest and (b) lowest abortion rates in England per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44 years in 2006. 
|Abortion Rates: Highest and Lowest 10 Primary Care Trusts per 1,000 Women Aged 15 to 44 years, 2006|
|Age standardised rate|
| Source: Statistical Bulletin, Abortion Statistics, England and Wales: 2006.|
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many women in (a) Essex Strategic Health Authority and (b) England and Wales had an abortion in 2006 who had already had (i) one, (ii) two, (iii) three, (iv) four and (v) five previous abortions. 
|Number of previous abortions for Essex and England and Wales residents, 2006|
|Number of previous abortions|
|0||1||2||3||4||5 or more||Total|
|(1) Essex PCTs are Mid Essex, North East Essex, South East Essex, South West Essex and West Essex and come within East of England Strategic Health Authority. Note: For confidentiality reasons, totals are grouped where there are less than 10 (0 to 9) cases, in line with the Office for National Statistics' guidance on the disclosure of abortion statistics (2005). Source: Statistical Bulletin, Abortion Statistics, England and Wales: 2006.|
Jenny Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) on what dates blood donations were made to the UK Blood Service by UK blood donors who later developed vCJD; and if he will make a statement; 
Dawn Primarolo: Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD) has been subsequently diagnosed in 18 people who before they developed symptoms of disease had donated blood in the United Kingdom which was transfused to recipients. These blood donations were made between 1981 and 2004, and 66 people have been identified who received blood from these donations. Some of these donations were made many years before vCJD was identified (and before Bovine Spongiform encephalopathy was described).
Ann Keen: Suggestions around the need to monitor nationally the incidence of metastatic breast cancer have been raised during the development of the Cancer Reform Strategy. However, the strategy is still being developed and it is too early to say what the final content will be.
Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which cancer drugs have been referred to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence for appraisal; what the date of (a) referral and (b) where applicable, the decision was of each; which drugs were (i) approved and (ii) not approved; and which type of cancer each drug treated. 
where the treatment(s) is recommended for routine use in the national health service;
where the treatment(s) is recommended for selective use in the NHS (i.e. for certain patients, after other treatments have failed etc); and
where the treatment(s) is recommended for use in research only or is not recommended.
The following table lists all the technology appraisals relating to cancer treatments published by NICE to the end of June 2007, including the date of referral, the condition and the drugs appraised, the date the guidance was published, the number of the appraisal (TA#) and the decision.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|