| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
6 Jun 2008 : Column 1204W—continued
NHS: ICT
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 7 January 2008, Official Report, columns 123-4W, on NHS: ICT, if he will reconcile the figures in the table with the £12.4 billion cost identified by the National Audit Office on page four of its report, The National Programme for IT in the NHS; how much capital and revenue expenditure there was by (a) local NHS organisations and (b) central NHS organisations and Connecting for Health; what estimate he has made of the (i) capital and (ii) revenue expenditure on IT in the NHS in the absence of a National Programme; and what the (A) capital and (B) revenue expenditure on IT was in the NHS between 1989-90 and 2004-05 expressed as a percentage of NHS expenditure. [204073]
Mr. Bradshaw: Information in the table in the earlier reply relates to expenditure to date, and the future expenditure plans to 2010-11, of NHS connecting for health. As well as sums in respect of the National Programme For Information Technology (NPfIT), the table also includes those of the agency's other responsibilities.
The £12.4 billion was the National Audit Office's then estimate of the 10-year cost, to 2013-14, including both central and local national health service costs, of NPfIT alone.
The former figures therefore relate to a broader range of business activities than the latter, and cover a different time period.
The Department has not made an estimate of expenditure on NHS IT in the absence of a national programme but an independent review confirmed that the likely costs of. Each NHS trust undertaking procurements for IT solutions would cost £4.5 billion more.
Totals of expenditure on NHS IT, as a percentage of NHS expenditure, in the years for which information is shown in the following table.
| Combine local and central IT revenue spend as a percentage of NHS revenue | Combined local and central IT capital spend as a percentage of NHS capital | |
| (1) Information not held centrally. | ||
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will place in the Library a copy of the documentation his Department has sent to trusts in 2008 concerning (a) Connecting for Health and (b) Choose and Book. [205555]
Mr. Bradshaw: Most communications and information material aimed both at national health service staff and the public, and other documentation aimed at NHS bodies relating to the work of NHS “Connecting for Health”, including choose and book, are now published on relevant websites. These are accessible by trusts who know to look there for key messages and update information. Documents, including data reports, are available on a call-off basis or made available on request.
Since 2007 responsibility for deployment planning and other key programme activities and associated resources has been given to strategic health authorities (SHAs) as a means of creating greater local ownership and to make the NHS more accountable for the delivery of the National Programme for Information Technology. Documentation arising from this responsibility is therefore generated locally within the NHS.
Exceptionally a letter was sent out on 7 February 2008 (“Choose and Book Release 4.0 and Free Choice (Gateway Ref. 9285)”) informing the NHS about changes to the choose and book software that would be introduced to support free choice. Attached with the letter were a number of documents explaining the changes to support communications at a local level. In addition, the document “Impact of Free Choice Policy on Choose and Book Release 4.0—Essential information for Providers and Commissioners” was published on 18 March as part of a package of documents to support the roll out of free choice. In both cases documents were sent under cover of the chief executive’s weekly bulletin.
Copies of the relevant documents have been placed in the Library.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the accuracy of the June 2006 National Audit Office estimate of the total cost of the NHS IT programme. [205859]
Mr. Bradshaw: The National Audit Office’s (NAO) estimate of the 10-year cost of the National Programme For Information Technology (NPfIT) to 2013-14 was £12.4 billion, including both central and local national health service costs. The NAO has reviewed this estimate to £12.656 billion, at 2004-05 prices, as part of its latest study of NPfIT published on 16 May 2008.
The following table was submitted as part of the memorandum of evidence submitted by the Department to the Health Select Committee in connection with the Committee’s 2007 public expenditure inquiry on health and personal social services. It reflects estimated cost reductions not included in the NAO’s estimate.
Innovation, Universities and Skills
Adult Education: Discrimination
Derek Conway: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills what estimate he has made of the effect of the Age Discrimination Regulations 2006 on the number of people aged over 60 years undertaking further education. [207670]
Bill Rammell: The Government are committed to ensuring equal opportunities for all learners, and that learning serves the needs of the whole community, including older people both within and outside the work force. Our strategy for World Class Skills and our reforms of wider adult learning are designed to ensure that everyone, whatever their age or background, has the opportunity to improve their skills, prospects and quality of life.
Protection from discrimination on grounds of age was introduced in the area of employment and vocational training through the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006. The Regulations mean that further education and training providers are not allowed to set age limits for access to training unless they can show objective justification why there is a real need to apply such limits. The Government have decided that all courses at further and higher education institutions are covered by the age regulations, whether they are specifically vocational or more general in nature. This ensures that there is a unified and consistent approach to age-related practices and policies in relation to all such provision.
Fee concessions for Further Education (FE) provision are offered at the discretion (and cost) of individual colleges and other FE providers, such as local authorities,
and I must stress that the Regulations do not bar providers from offering these fee discounts. Many colleges and other providers have longstanding, formal, informal and discretionary arrangements based on age when deciding eligibility for fee concessions, and it will continue to be the learning provider’s decision as to whether to offer these subsidies to individuals. As a result, neither my Department nor the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) holds information on those learners who receive these concessions.
I refer the hon. Member to my written statement on 16 May 2007, Official Report, column 35WS:
“Guidance on the vocational training aspects of the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations is available on the DTI website. It is aimed at, amongst others, providers of further and adult education. The guidance makes it clear that age related practices, such as age related fee concessions, may be objectively justified where they are a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. It is for providers to produce evidence of such objective justification if called upon to do so, or to take their own legal advice if necessary. Guidance on objective justification is also available on page 30 of the ACAS guidance on the Age Regulations.”
Derek Conway: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills if he will place in the Library a summary of his discussions with the Learning and Skills Council on the impact on the number of people aged over 60 years undertaking further education as a result of the Age Discrimination Regulations 2006. [207671]
Bill Rammell: The Government are committed to ensuring equal opportunities for all learners, and that learning serves the needs of the whole community, including older people both within and outside the work force. Our strategy for World Class Skills and our reforms of wider adult learning are designed to ensure that everyone, whatever their age or background, has the opportunity to improve their skills, prospects and quality of life.
Ministers in my Department have regular discussions with the Learning and Skills Council on a wide range of issues, including during the lead up to the publication of the annual Grant Letter to the LSC. The Grant Letter sets out the Government’s priorities for further education and adult skills, including the expectations it places on the LSC in relation to equality and diversity. A copy of each annual Grant Letter has been placed in the Library.
Protection from discrimination on grounds of age was introduced in the area of employment and vocational training through the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006. The Regulations mean that further education and training providers are not allowed to set age limits for access to training unless they can show objective justification why there is a real need to apply such limits. The Government have decided that all courses at further and higher education institutions are covered by the Age Regulations, whether they are specifically vocational or more general in nature. This ensures that there is a unified and consistent approach to age-related practices and policies in relation to all such provision.
I refer the hon. Member to my written statement on 16 May 2007, Official Report, column 35WS:
“Guidance on the vocational training aspects of the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations is available on the DTI website. It is aimed at, amongst others, providers of further and adult education. The guidance makes it clear that age related practices, such as age
related fee concessions, may be objectively justified where they are a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. It is for providers to produce evidence of such objective justification if called upon to do so, or to take their own legal advice if necessary. Guidance on objective justification is also available on page 30 of the ACAS guidance on the Age Regulations.”
Apprentices
Mr. Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills whether Government targets for apprenticeships include apprentices who have completed a programme-led course rather than a work-based craft apprenticeship. [208755]
Mr. Lammy: No. Targets for apprenticeships are for work-based apprenticeships only. Programme-led apprenticeships are an important progression route to a full apprenticeship framework. They are excluded from our targets because apprenticeships are employer led and these learners are not participating in a full apprenticeship framework of work-based training.
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills how many apprenticeship (a) starts and (b) completions there were in (i) the public sector and (ii) the private sector in each area covered by a sector skills council in the most recent year for which figures are available. [208846]
Mr. Lammy: Information about the number of public and private sector apprenticeship starts and completions within each sector skill area is not centrally available. We emphasised in World-class Apprenticeships our commitment to improve the quality and availability of information about apprenticeships and increase the number of apprenticeships available in the public sector. This will be a priority for the National Apprenticeships Service which will be operational from April 2009.
Apprentices: Finance
Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills how much funding was allocated to Warrington Collegiate for apprenticeships in each of the last five years. [209231]
Mr. Lammy: Information on Learning and Skills Council funding allocated to Warrington Collegiate for apprenticeships is provided in the following table. Data are only available from 2004-05.
| Warrington Collegiate Apprenticeships funding allocation | |||
| £000 | |||
| Year | Age 16-18 | Age 19+ | Overall |
| Source: Learning and Skills Council | |||
Foreign Students: Syria
Mr. Paul Goodman:
To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills what estimate he has made of the number of British students who visited Syria to study (a) Arabic, (b) Islamic Studies and (c) any other academic course in each of the last 10 years;
and what information he has on which institutions they attended. [209421]
Bill Rammell: Information on British students who go abroad to study is not available centrally.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |