|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Deaths in Broadmoor since 1997 from West London Mental Health NHS Trust|
|Number of suicides (suspected or with inquest verdict)||Other deaths (natural causes)||Total deaths|
|(1) This includes one homicide.|
(2) To 30 November 2007.
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health further to the statement in paragraph 1.4 of his Department's Cancer Reform Strategy on the fall in cancer mortality in under 75s between 1996 and 2005, what the drop in cancer mortality in people under 75 years was in the equivalent period before 1996; and how many lives were saved by the reduction in cancer mortality over this period. 
Ann Keen [holding answer 17 December 2007]: Lives saved is an assessment of the cumulative effect of year on year reductions to the numbers of deaths in a specific age group and from a specific cause of death. In this case, it relates to deaths from cancer at ages under 75. It is calculated by subtracting from the number of deaths that occurred in the first year of the period, the number of deaths registered in each subsequent year, and then totalling the differences.
The cancer mortality target rate is calculated using three-year moving averages. In order to make concise statements, the three-year periods are sometimes referred to by the middle year of the period. This convention has been used in the first bullet point in paragraph 1.4 of the Cancer Reform Strategy. From the baseline in 1995-96-97 to the most recent period, 2004-05-06, the cancer mortality rate in people aged under 75 in England has fallen by over 17 per cent.
Lives saved are calculated using single year data. The middle year of the baseline period, 1996, is used as the baseline. Using single year data, to the most recent period, 2006, there were approximately 60,000 lives saved, compared to 1996.
The equivalent period before 1996 is 1985 to 1995. From 1984-85-86 to 1993-94-95 cancer mortality in people under age 75 in England fell by almost 10 per cent. With 1985 as the baseline, this equates to approximately 35,000 lives saved between 1985 and 1995.
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to monitor the proposed extension of the 31-day waiting time standard to cover all cancer treatments as described in his Departments Cancer Reform Strategy. 
Ann Keen: We will monitor national health service progress towards delivery of the extended cancer waiting times standards, and achievement of the standards by NHS organisations. The mechanism for monitoring progress is currently under consideration by a Department/NHS expert group.
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he intends to establish the national audit in primary care of all patients diagnosed with cancer as described in paragraph 3.61 of his Departments Cancer Reform Strategy. 
The national audit in primary care of patients newly diagnosed with cancer will be undertaken in collaboration with the Royal College of General Practitioners and the National Patient Safety
Agency. The National Cancer Director is working with those organisations to establish the details of the audit, and will then establish how soon the audit can begin.
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) whether the consultation on the level of personal expenses allowance contained within the Charging for Residential Accommodation Guide consultation 2008 will follow Cabinet Office guidance regarding a minimum consultation period of 12 weeks; on what date the consultation period will commence; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) over what period the consultation on the level of personal expenses allowance contained within the Charging for Residential Accommodation Guide consultation 2008 will occur; and on what date the consultation period will commence. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The Department will undertake public consultation early in 2008 on the recommendations of a group of key stakeholders on changes to the Charging for Residential Accommodation Guide. This will include consultation on the stakeholders' recommendations on the level of the personal expenses allowance. The consultation will be in accordance with Cabinet Office guidance, allowing 12 weeks for comments to be submitted.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the risks to the health of children in London from the level of performance of the Child Health Interim Application system. 
Mr. Bradshaw: BTs provision of an interim child health system pending delivery of a long-term solution reduced the risks arising from the 10 primary care trusts (PCTs) concerned being left with no system following the decision by the previous commercial child health system supplier to withdraw its product from the market.
In the period following implementation of the Child Health Interim Application (CHIA) system, figures generated for the Health Protection Agencys Cover of Vaccination Evaluated Rapidly (COVER) reports indicated that the uptake of immunisations had dropped. However, there is no evidence of any causal relationship with the CHIA implementation.
To mitigate any risks arising from this drop, an immunisation uptake audit was undertaken across the 10 PCTs who were using CHIA in London. The initial findings from the audit show that a significant number of children who appeared in the system as unimmunised had actually received their immunisations. There were also a number of children who had not been immunised, but the audit revealed a number of reasons, unconnected with the computer system changes, why this was the case.
Mr. Randall: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of levels of provision of chiropody services for older people in (a) Uxbridge constituency and (b) the London borough of Hillingdon; and if he will make a statement. 
(2) what equality impact assessments have been carried out by the Commission for Social Care Inspection of (a) its estates strategy and (b) the restructuring and headcount reduction programme for 2007-08; what the main findings were of those assessments; and what steps have been taken by the Commission for Social Care Inspection management in response; 
(3) how much and what proportion of the Commission for Social Care Inspections payroll budget was spent on agency staff in the last 12 months; and what proportion of the Commissions spending on agency staff was accounted for by agency fees. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: We have been informed that the chief inspector of the Commission for Social Care Inspection has replied in writing to my hon. Friend. A copy of the reply has been placed in the Library
Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what his Department's policy is on the selection of (a) real and (b) artificial Christmas trees for his Department's festive decorations; and how real trees are disposed of. 
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much has been spent by his Department (a) in total and (b) on staff costs on promoting equality and diversity in each of the last three years for which figures are available; and how many people are employed by his Department for this purpose. 
The Department has a continuing commitment to equality and diversity, which conforms to all statutory duties and supports the Cabinet Office Diversity 10 Point Plan. There is a small equality and diversity team, which is responsible for strategy and policy development. However, the delivery of the diversity agenda is mainstreamed across all functions
and rolesboth in the Human Resources Branch and the wider organisation. Because considerations of equality and diversity have become, over the years, integral components of the business and hence a very wide range of staff activities it is not possible to separately identify and report on costs for those components without incurring disproportionate costs.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what land surplus to his Department's requirements it is (a) selling, (b) leasing and (c) intending to (i) sell and (ii) lease; and what the size and name of each relevant site is. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The information in the following tables shows the detail of the more substantial properties in the ownership of the Secretary of State, that the Department is either selling or leasing or intending to sell or lease.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|