---

22 Jan 2008 : Column 1948W—continued

The following table shows the number of operations carried out in the last two complete years at Royal Free Hampstead NHS trust, Barnet and Chase Farm hospital NHS trust and Barnet primary care trust.

	Royal Free Hampstead NHS trust	Barnet and Chase Farm hospitals NHS trust	Barnet primary care trust
2006-07	49,899	49,408	49,408
2005-06	40,376	44,635	44,654
Notes: 1. Count of Finished Consultant Episodes (FCE) that include an OPSC4 procedure/intervention (2006-07:A01—X97 or AOl—X59 prior to 2005-06) at Royal Free Hampstead NHS trust, Barnet and Chase Farm hospital NHS trust and Barnet primary care trust 2. NHS Hospitals England and activity performed in the independent sector in England commissioned by English NHS, 2004-05—2006-07. 3. Finished Consultant Episode (FCE) An FCE is defined as a period of admitted patient care under one consultant within one health care provider. The figures do not represent the number of patients, as a person may have more than one episode of care within the year. 4. Finished Consultant Episode (FCE) with an Operative Procedure A count of FCEs with an operative procedure is the number of FCEs where the procedure was mentioned in any of the 12 (four prior to 2002-03) operative procedure fields in a HES record. A record is only included once in each count, even if the procedure is mentioned in more than one operative procedure field of the record. Please note that more procedures are carried out than finished consultant episodes with an operation. For example, patients under-going a cataract operation would tend to have at least two procedures—removal of the faulty lens and the fitting of a new one—counted in a single finished consultant episode.

Trade Unions

Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what meetings he had with trades union officials since 1 July 2007; on what dates; and with which trades unions. [179853]

Mr. Bradshaw: Ministers meet many people as part of the process of policy development. It is not normal practice to disclose details of such meetings.

Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent assessment he has made of the (a) financial position and (b) effectiveness of management of the Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust; and if he will make a statement. [179561]

Dawn Primarolo: The financial position of national health service trusts is subject to continual monitoring.
22 Jan 2008 : Column 1949W
According to the quarter two figures, the Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust is forecasting a £5 million surplus at the end of 2007-08. The cash generated from this surplus will be used to partially re-pay a loan granted to the trust by the Department to cover historic deficits.

The Department performance manages NHS organisations through the strategic health authorities who provide leadership and support to ensure that trusts and primary care trusts operate effectively and deliver improved performance. Working within this performance management regime the Department has not made an assessment of the effectiveness of management of the Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust.

Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust: Debt

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what criteria were applied to assess the eligibility of the Royal Wolverhampton and University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS trusts for the writing-off of their historic debt; for what reasons the Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust has had its historic debt written off; and if he will make a statement. [179562]

Dawn Primarolo: In 2006-07, the Department introduced a more transparent rules based financial regime. As part of this new regime, the Department considered the cash needs of each national health service (NHS) trust.

Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust was able to demonstrate the ability to pay back its loan, and therefore the Department granted the loan. However, two trusts within the West Midlands Region (the Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust, the University Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust), were not given a loan because they could not afford to meet the repayments.

22 Jan 2008 : Column 1950W

These two trusts were classified as being ‘financially challenged’ and departmental officials have worked in partnership with the West Midlands strategic health authority (SHA) on a review process to identify long-term financial solutions for them. In January 2008, bespoke solutions to ensure these trusts are able to regain financial balance were proposed. The solutions do not involve the Department writing off any historic deficits, but they do contain an element of financial support that is to be provided by the local SHA.

Justice

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991: Prosecutions

Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many (a) prosecutions and (b) convictions there have been under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 since 1997, broken down by offence; and if he will make a statement. [177714]

Jonathan Shaw: I have been asked to reply.

The following tables show the number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts (Table 1) and found guilty at all courts (Table 2) for offences under the Dangerous Dogs Acts 1989 and 1991, England and Wales 1997 to 2006^{(1, 2)}

⁽¹⁾ Data provided on the principal offence basis.

⁽²⁾ Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.

22 Jan 2008 : Column 1951W

22 Jan 2008 : Column 1952W

Table 1
Offence description	Principal statute	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
Failure to comply with an order to keep a dog under proper control etc. Dangerous dog not kept under proper control.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1989. Dogs Act 1871 Sec 2.	492	455	401	462	375	336	335	352	306	232
Breeding or breeding from a fighting dog.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(a).	1	6	1	2	1	6	4	15	3	2
Selling, exchanging, offering, advertising or exposing for sale a fighting dog.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(b)	—	—	—	1	—	—	—	—	—	—
Allowing a fighting dog to be in a public place without a muzzle or a lead.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(d).	12	7	11	9	4	3	2	2	3	1
Abandoning, or allowing to stray, a fighting dog.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(e).	3	—	2	—	—	1	—	—	1	—
Possession, without exemption, of a Pit Bull Terrier, Japanese Tosa or other designated fighting dog.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(3).	15	23	12	5	4	6	1	5	11	8
Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be dangerously out of control in a public place injuring any person.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(1).	259	434	449	458	490	537	560	597	645	703
Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be out of control in a public place, no injury being caused.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(1).	175	248	254	266	278	284	329	290	278	278
Owner or person in charge allowing dog to enter a non- public place and injure any person.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(3).	22	28	34	48	50	38	52	48	44	54
Owner or person in charge allowing dog to enter a non-public place causing reasonable apprehension of injury to a person.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(3).	10	12	9	24	20	18	20	11	24	19
Failing to give up a dog for destruction of having custody of a dog when disqualified	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 4(8).	7	6	30	23	39	29	20	22	16	12
Total		996	1,219	1,203	1,298	1,261	1,258	1,323	1,342	1,331	1,309

22 Jan 2008 : Column 1953W

22 Jan 2008 : Column 1954W

Table 2
Offence description	Principal statute	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
Failure to comply with an order to keep a dog under proper control etc. Dangerous dog not kept under proper control.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1989. Dogs Act 1871 Sec 2.	98	106	101	84	101	105	128	177	139	108
Breeding or breeding from a fighting dog.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(a).	—	5	—	—	—	3	2	14	1	1
Selling, exchanging, offering, advertising or exposing for sale a fighting dog.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(b)	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Allowing a fighting dog to be in a public place without a muzzle or a lead.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(d).	8	2	6	6	2	2	—	1	3	—
Abandoning, or allowing to stray, a fighting dog.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(2)(e).	2	—	1	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Possession, without exemption, of a Pit Bull Terrier, Japanese Tosa or other designated fighting dog.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 1(3).	9	8	5	2	2	2	1	2	7	5
Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be dangerously out of control in a public place injuring any person.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(1).	121	239	262	260	285	300	302	350	403	458
Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be out of control in a public place, no injury being caused.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(1).	88	125	126	130	157	150	171	167	168	160
Owner or person in charge allowing dog to enter a non- public place and injure any person.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(3).	5	13	19	32	31	30	33	25	25	29
Owner or person in charge allowing dog to enter a non-public place causing reasonable apprehension of injury to a person.	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 3(3).	4	8	5	13	14	7	10	5	9	11
Failing to give up a dog for destruction of having custody of a dog when disqualified	Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Sec 4(8).	4	6	18	16	31	23	12	18	9	4
Total		339	512	543	543	623	622	659	759	764	776
Source: Court Proceedings Database—Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Ministry of Justice Our ref: 014-08

---