2. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE
2.1.2 What will be the consequence of the
withdrawal of £1.285 billion of Department Unallocated Provision
capital funding in 2010, as referred to in the Departmental Report
2009 at paragraph 5.16? If this is not actually needed for any
specific purpose, why did the Department bid for it in the Comprehensive
Spending Review 2007? (Q7)
Answer
1. This was a change to bring the Department
of Health's capital allocation in line with planned levels of
spending. It is normal practice to update budgets to reflect actual
spending plans.
2. Full details of the capital expenditure
programme for 2010-11 have not yet been finalised. However, it
should be noted that the revised 2010-11 NHS budget is 6% higher
than the latest year's, 2008-09, provisional outturn expenditure
of £4,410 million.
3. In the Comprehensive Spending Review
the capital Department Unallocated Provision was earmarked for
private finance initiatives coming on balance sheet and the implications
of Lord Darzi's NHS Next Stage Review—both of which were
uncertain at the time. The 2010-11 Department Unallocated Provision
is now no longer needed for these.
4. Given the scale of uncertainty around
future investment at the time of the Comprehensive Spending Review,
it was sensible to set aside money as a contingency.
| 
