|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Robert Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what impact assessments were undertaken of the effects on licensed premises of the ban on smoking in public places were carried out (a) before and (b) since the implementation of the ban. 
Gillian Merron: The Regulatory Impact Assessment for the smokefree element of the Health Act 2006 is published, a copy has already been placed in the Library, and is available on the Department's website at:
We have given a commitment to review the impact of the smokefree law three years after its implementation on 1 July 2007. The review will take place in the latter part of 2010. In preparation for the review, the Department has commissioned a number of research reports. Once these reports have been completed and peer reviewed they will be published and will be given full consideration as part of the review.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 8 December 2009, Official Report, column 288W, on the Social Enterprise Investment Fund, on what date each organisation in receipt of a grant from the Social Enterprise Investment Fund in 2009-10 (a) applied for and (b) received its grant. 
|Organisation||Application date||Disbursement date||Grant or loan|
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 8 December 2009, Official Report, column 288W, on the Social Enterprise Investment Fund, how much the Social Enterprise Investment Fund has spent on business support services since July 2008; and how many organisations have made use of the business support services provided by the Fund in (a) 2008-09 and (b) 2009-10. 
Phil Hope: In 2008-09, the fund manager did not offer business support services. In 2009-10, business support services were offered and 31 organisations have made use of the services to date, and received £64,686 in total.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether the provision of free personal care at home falls under the (a) partnership, (b) insurance or (c) comprehensive model of the Social Care Green Paper. 
Phil Hope: It is very important not to conflate the funding for a national care service with the funding for the Government's Personal Care at Home Bill. The Bill is about putting more money into the system as soon as possible to help people with the highest needs live independently at home. The Green Paper is about building a sustainable system for the future. We have been consulting widely on how to best do that.
All the proposals outlined in the Bill are funded through efficiencies and reprioritisations in the Department of Health and in Local Government. The Bill will protect those who currently receive personal care services for free from changes in the future. It will also help around 130,000 people who need home care for the first time to regain their independence. This intensive help, or "re-ablement", will help people to regain their independence and prevent ill health. This means people will maintain their dignity and rebuild their confidence so that they can live at home for longer. As well as providing a free personal care service to thousands of people, the Bill will also benefit their families.
There are still huge challenges in the care and support system and the Green Paper sought people's views on how we resolve those challenges and create a sustainable system for the long term. But we cannot stand still in meeting the challenge of rising costs now. The Bill will help support those who are currently most in need of personal care in their own homes.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether an assessment for a package of care as proposed in the Social Care Green Paper includes assessing the extra costs of being disabled in the same terms at the White Paper in which that allowance was proposed. 
Phil Hope: The Green Paper "Shaping the Future of Care Together" proposed a new nationally consistent care assessment process. We will give more details about the National Care Service offer in our White Paper later this year, and this will include information on the care assessment process.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 9 December 2009, Official Report, column 498W, on social services, from which of his Department's budgets he plans to fund the transition costs. 
Phil Hope: A one-off transition cost of £335 million is set out in the impact assessment for the first half-year of the policy, from October 2010. Of this, £210 million will come from the Department and £125 million from local government efficiency savings.
For details of the budgets which will be re-prioritised to meet these first half-year costs, I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Mark Simmonds) on 8 December 2009, Official Report, column 296W.
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health with reference to paragraph 6.46, pages 109-10 of the pre-Budget report, Cm 7747, how the anticipated savings correlate with the estimate in the impact assessment for his Department's Personal Care at Home Bill that more people will be brought into the state-funded home care system. 
Phil Hope: The pre-Budget report announced that councils will make £250 million efficiency savings by 2012-13 from reducing the significant variations in the proportion of funding that councils spend on residential care provision through supporting more people to live for longer in their own homes.
These efficiency savings will be used to help meet the ever growing pressure on budgets from demographic changes and to support more people to live in their homes through the offer of free personal care for those with the greatest need. These savings may be used alongside the funding made available by the Department to deliver the proposals of the Personal Care at Home Bill.
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what assessment his Department has made of the ability of local authorities to deliver free personal care to people with (a) disabilities and (b) the highest need; 
(2) what assessment his Department has made of the (a) capacity and (b) capability of local authorities to provide free personal care to all people who need it; and if he will make a statement. 
Phil Hope: It is the responsibility for each local authority (LA), at a local level, to determine and manage the extent to which they have the ability, capability and capacity to deliver the policy to meet their population needs. The consultation document, "Personal Care at Home-a consultation on proposals for regulation and guidance", recognises this and, at section 2.4, sets out specific areas for LAs to consider and potential ways in which the Department can support LAs.
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate his Department has made of the annual cost of providing free personal care for people with disabilities; and if he will make a statement. 
To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) what steps his Department has taken to ensure that children with an
autistic spectrum disorder have appropriate support from Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services; 
(4) whether the proxy indicator used in public service agreement 12 on the development and delivery of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services for children and young people with learning disabilities is intended to cover children with autistic spectrum disorders who do not have a learning disability. 
The Government have taken steps to ensure that Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) are improved for all children and adolescents, including those with an autistic spectrum disorder. The independent CAMHS Review, commissioned by Ministers, reported in November 2008. The Review made 20 recommendations aimed at improving children's and young people's mental health and psychological wellbeing. The Government is shortly to publish a Full Government Response to the Review, aimed at providers and commissioners of services, which describes how professionals can work effectively together so that everyone in the wider children's workforce knows exactly where to turn when a child has emotional wellbeing or mental health needs.
The children's service mapping exercise in England in 2007-08 found that the number of children and young people supported with ASD had increased from 7,719 in 2006 (7 per cent. of caseload) to 10,231 in 2007 (9 per cent.). 685 CAMHS teams supported ASD children and young people and their families. Of these 108 CAMHS teams reported providing targeted work for children and young people with ASD. Additionally, of the 349 community paediatric services, 193 (55 per cent.) ran ASD clinics.
There are Tier 4 services which cater specifically for children with ASD. Examples include the Hawksmere Children's Unit (Autism Therapy and Education Centre) in Hertfordshire, which is specifically for boys from the age of 13-18 with ASD, and Cygnet Springside, based in the north west and south west of England.
Within PSA12 (to improve the health and wellbeing of children and young people) the Government are committed to improving the mental and emotional health and wellbeing of children and young people. Four proxy measures are being used to monitor progress: the development and delivery of CAMHS for children and young people with learning disabilities; appropriate accommodation and support for 16/17 year olds; availability of 24-hour cover to meet urgent mental health needs; and joint commissioning of early intervention support. Services for children and young people with ASD are
included in three of these proxies and those who additionally have a learning disability are included in the learning disability proxy.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families which local authorities have received no funding under the Building Schools for the Future programme; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Coaker: 75 local authorities have received no funding under the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme. 20 of these have already entered the BSF programme but will not have received any funding by the end of the 2009-10 financial year. These authorities are set out in the following list.
Hammersmith and Fulham
Stockton on Tees
Bath and North East Somerset*
Brighton and Hove
Cheshire West and Chester
City of London
East Riding of Yorkshire
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|