Public Expenditure on Health and Personal Social Services 2009 - Health Committee Contents


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.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2010
Prepared 20 January 2010