| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Platt of Writtle: My Lords, what are the Department for Education and Skills and the learning and skills councils doing to ensure that careers information teachers and advisers are sufficiently experienced and qualified to encourage more young people to take up careers in science and engineering? No doubt the noble Lord would expect me to say, "Girls as well as boys".
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, a series of programmes have that as their central role. It is also important to note that the new Council for Science and Technology has allowed us to embark on a process of rationalising all the information being published by institutes and other bodies so that the careers information being sent to schools is produced in a simple form that teachers can use, as opposed to the enormous amount of literature they currently receive which, according to our recent studies, is simply being thrown away. We are acting on that point through the Engineering and Technology Board.
The second programme I should mention is the science and engineering ambassadors schemes which seek to ensure that schoolchildren understand exactly what careers in science and technology are all about.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, does the Minister agree that science education in schools would be helped greatly if more teachers were teaching the subject because that was the one they had been trained to teach? Teachers are being asked to teach subjects for which they have not been trained.
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, I agree totally with the noble Baroness. It is of fundamental importance to education that those teaching the science subjects are appropriately qualified. It is a matter of great concern that, for example, a considerable number of people teaching physics in our schools do not have a qualification in the subject. That is a source of great worry.
This problem was addressed in the Roberts report. We are looking at increasing funding in the area to ensure that we recruit more scientists and technologists. However, we are recruiting in an area where people can take other jobs that are reasonably well paid. We are tackling the issue which, as I have said, was addressed both in the Roberts report and in the paper I referred to in my original Answer.
Baroness Sharp of Guildford: My Lords, I welcome the reply given by the Minister to the Question of the noble Lord, Lord Hoyle. It is good that there will now be scientific advisers in more departments. What co-ordination will there be among those scientific advisers? Has the Chief Scientific Adviser in his own department—who has been called the Chief Government Scientist—had a degree of de facto responsibility for co-ordinating effort between departments? If so, will this continue?
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, the Chief Scientific Adviser has a committee on which sit the chief scientists of each department or their representatives. That has been quite effective in co-ordinating certain issues. The whole purpose of these measures is to ensure greater quality control by the Chief Scientific Adviser of the work being carried out in government departments. That will be achieved in two ways. First, in future he will be involved in the appointment of the chief scientific officers in each department to ensure that there is proper quality control; and, secondly, as I mentioned, he will carry out a peer review of the science undertaken in each government department. He will have a considerable degree of ability to maintain quality within government departments.
NHS Patients: Treatment Overseas
2.51 p.m.
Baroness Sharples asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What is the extra cost to the National Health Service of treating patients abroad; and what will be the effect on the finances of National Health Service hospitals.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, the cost of treating patients abroad will be met from existing local budgets. It is up to primary care trusts to commission treatment for their local populations within the resources that they have available.
Baroness Sharples: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Can he say how many patients have been treated abroad so far and how many are expected to be treated abroad?
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, so far as concerns the test-bed scheme, as it is described, 190 patients received treatment in France or Germany between January and April at a cost of around £1.1 million. We do not have figures or estimates for such treatment in the future. That will depend on local decision-making within the National Health Service. We are evaluating the impact of the first pilot scheme and we will make that information available to the NHS. I hope that that will then inform future decisions.
Lord Clement-Jones: My Lords, the Government have prayed in aid commercial confidentiality when discussing the terms of these contracts with overseas providers. The outcome of the evaluation will be absolutely crucial. When will the results of the evaluation of the pilot schemes be available?
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, I cannot give a precise date because it has not yet been decided. It is the case that there are issues of commercial confidentiality. I have disclosed that the total cost of the January to April scheme was about £1.1 million. I understand that the costs of specific procedures are comparable to the costs of purchasing procedures in the UK private sector.
Lord Harrison: My Lords, given the need for savings in the costs of bureaucracy, is my noble friend advising PCTs to open euro accounts for transactions of this kind with others in the euro-zone countries?
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, I shall be happy to pass on my noble friend's advice to the NHS. I am sure that it will be very glad to receive it.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, is the Minister aware that many people—including myself—admire the Government for taking the difficult decision to have patients treated overseas? Can he explain how other countries succeed in running their health services in such a way that they can look after their own patients and have room enough to spare to look after others when we do not seem to be able to look after our own?
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, the noble Earl should look no further than the record of his own government over 18 years, during which time there was consistent under-investment in the resources of the National Health Service. We have committed ourselves, over a five-year period, to raising the
amount of money spent on health in this country to 9.4 per cent of GDP. That will bring us up to roughly the level of spending in France. We will then be in a position to ensure that the targets we set will be met; that we will reduce waiting lists; and that we will have first-class services. In the mean time, it surely makes sense to use whatever capacity is available—whether in this country or abroad—to cut the amount of waiting that NHS patients have to deal with at the moment.
Baroness Noakes: My Lords, does the Minister accept that it is legitimate for the more than 1 million people waiting for treatment to ask that the NHS spends its money wisely? Will he answer the simple question posed by my noble friend Lady Sharples? What is the extra cost of treating NHS patients abroad compared with treating them in the NHS?
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, I thought I had answered that question. I said that the January to April pilot cost £1.1 million. I said also that the costs of specific procedures purchased abroad are comparable to the costs of purchasing procedures in the UK private sector. There are enormous variations in the costs of treatment in the National Health Service. It would be virtually impossible to give a two line answer that out of those procedures some are worth more in relation to NHS costs. The noble Baroness was responsible for financial management in the NHS—she was a distinguished financial manager, if I may say so, for many years—and she will know that there are enormous variations in NHS costs. Of course we want to see value for money in using the private sector. We want to see comparability wherever commissioners purchase services— whether in the NHS or in the private sector—but, at the moment, it makes sense to use additional capacity to cut the number of people on waiting lists.
Lord McColl of Dulwich: My Lords, the Minister said that the continental costs were comparable to the private sector costs in this country. Did the purchasing go out to tender to the private sector in this country?
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, the NHS is using the private sector in this country to a great extent. Indeed, according to data made available to the department by the Independent Healthcare Association, between April 2000 and March 2002, at least 73,000 day cases, out-patient appointments and in-patient treatments were carried out for NHS patients in the independent sector. We are using the independent sector in this country, but we will also use other providers where it is appropriate to do so.
Baroness Howells of St Davids: My Lords, does the Minister agree that any money spent on ill patients is well spent? We know that there have been years of
neglect which have caused the NHS almost to pack up. We should all be pleased for patients who are having their hip operations abroad at whatever cost.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |