| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
30 Oct 2007 : Column 1209W—continued
Bovine Tuberculosis
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of whether there is a link between the incidence of bovine tuberculosis and the incidence of atypical tuberculosis. [161711]
Dawn Primarolo: The Department is not aware of any link between the incidence of bovine tuberculosis and the incidence of human disease caused by non-tuberculosis mycobacteria. The incidence of bovine tuberculosis in humans in the United Kingdom in recent years has remained stable, at less than 1 per cent., of all reported tuberculosis cases.
Central Middlesex Birthing Centre
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the cost was of building and equipping Central Middlesex Birthing Centre. [157380]
Mr. Bradshaw: This is a matter for the local national health service. However, I am informed by NHS London that the cost of building and equipping Central Middlesex Birthing Centre was approximately £3 million.
Central Middlesex Birthing Centre: Admissions
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate his Department has made of the annual number of patients that are likely to be admitted to Central Middlesex Birthing Centre. [157372]
Mr. Bradshaw: This information is not held centrally by the Department of Health.
Primary care trusts (PCTs) are responsible for commissioning health services to meet the needs of the local population. I understand that in September 2007 Brent PCT and North West London Hospitals NHS Trust issued a joint public consultation document—“The future of the Brent Birth Centre”. This estimates that around 300 women per annum choose to have their babies at the Brent Birth Centre, also known as the Central Middlesex Birthing Centre.
Children: Cannabis
Mr. Spring: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many children under the age of 16 years sought treatment for cannabis use in (a) England, (b) the East of England and (c) Suffolk in each of the last five years. [161609]
Dawn Primarolo: We do not hold data for the whole of the period requested. Data for 2005-06 and 2006-07, the years for which data are available are contained in the following tables.
| 2005-06: Main drug of use in treatment—cannabis ages 9 -15 | |||
| In treatment | |||
| Cannabis | |||
| Drug action team (DAT) | All drugs | Number | Percentage |
| 2006-07 : Main drug of use in treatment—cannabis ages 9 -15 | |||
| In treatment | |||
| Cannabis | |||
| DAT | All drugs | Number | Percentage |
| 2005-06: Ages 9 -15 main drug cannabis | |||
| In treatment | |||
| Cannabis | |||
| Region | All drugs | Number | Percentage |
| 2006-07: Ages 9-15 main drug cannabis | |||
| In treatment | |||
| Cannabis | |||
| Region | All drugs | Number | Percentage |
| Ages 9-15 main drug cannabis | |||
| In treatment | |||
| Cannabis | |||
| All drugs | Number | Percentage | |
Children: Protection
Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations he received prior to publishing the 2005 guidance paper Working Together to Safeguard Children. [159878]
Kevin Brennan: I have been asked to reply.
The new ‘Working Together to Safeguard Children’, published in 2006, replaced earlier guidance published in 1999. In 2005 the guidance was published in draft for consultation by the then Department for Education and Skills (DFES), now the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF). A report on the consultation was published in February 2006. (A copy of the report has been place in the Library of the House). The majority of respondents welcomed the guidance and believed it clearly defined the roles and responsibilities of all professionals in working together to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. A number of issues were raised by respondents including the length of the guidance; issues about the breadth of the role of new Local Safeguarding Children Boards (LSCBs); the removal of the Child Protection Register; and the clarity of draft guidance on child death reviews.
Chiropody: Elderly
Dr. Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what funding was allocated to NHS chiropody services for the elderly in each of the last five years; [161651]
(2) whether the waiting lists for NHS chiropody services for the elderly comply with the Government's commitment to 18 weeks from referral to treatment in (a) England, (b) the North East and (c) Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland constituency; and if he will make a statement. [161673]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: Information about how much funding primary care trusts (PCTs) allocate to chiropody services is not collected centrally. It is for PCTs in partnership with local stakeholders to determine how best to use their funds to meet national and local priorities for improving health, outlined in the national service frameworks and to commission services accordingly.
Therapies and treatments delivered by chiropodists are included in the 18-week maximum waiting time target if they form part of a consultant led pathway.
In order to support all services provided by chiropodists, including those provided to older people, the Department is implementing a therapies improvement programme. The programme will focus on improving access to allied health professional services through improving the available information and data management. The programme will support improvement in therapy services through providing local events and information for allied health professionals and local health communities.
Dr. Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what services are provided through the NHS for elderly patients requiring chiropody treatment in (a) the North East and (b) the area corresponding as closely as possible to Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland constituency. [161652]
Mr. Ivan Lewis: This information is not held centrally.
Clostridium: Disease Control
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the evidential basis was for setting the Public Service Agreement target to reduce clostridium difficile rates by 2011 by 30 per cent. compared to a 2007-08 baseline. [160739]
Ann Keen: The basis for the indicator was the mandatory c lostridium difficile surveillance data. An analysis of the best performing 25 per cent. of non-specialist trusts indicated that a 30 per cent. reduction could be achieved if rates in the other trusts improved to the same level as trusts within this group i.e. all trusts achieve the rates of the best. This is not the limit of our ambition but the minimum reduction that we are asking the service to achieve.
Community Nurses
Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many (a) full-time and (b) part-time community matrons there were in each of the last five years, broken down by trust. [152235]
Mr. Bradshaw: This information is shown in the table.
Community matrons were collected separately from modern matrons for the first time in the 2006 census with their own specific occupation code. In 2005 the Department defined modern matrons working in community settings as community matrons.
Prior to 2001, the pay grade “matron” had been obsolete for over 30 years as the number of nurse managers have been recorded in the national health service census with general and senior managers.
It takes the work force census a few years to catch up with new occupation titles. Before 2005 it is not possible to define which staff grouping community matrons would have fallen under.
In September 2006 there were 366 community matrons, an increase of 99 or 37 per cent. since 2005. Based on recent discussions with a number of strategic health authorities (SHA) we believe that the census is an undercount, with community matrons most likely being recorded in the census within other occupational groups.
We are committed to increasing the number of community matrons and local development plans strongly suggest this is happening.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |