| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
14 Jan 2003 : Column 661—continued
Mr. Tyrie: If the money is going in, why is there a #60 million deficit in the strategic health authority's budget?
Mr. Lammy: The hon. Gentleman knows that, across the piece in Britain, different health economies find themselves in different positions for historical reasons. The issue that he raises goes back some considerable time, but we have reached a point where we are putting
in significant investment. I should point out to him that a 20 per cent. cut would make the situation even worse for his local strategic health authority.Much has been said in the media, and recently in this House, about the future of the King Edward VII hospital, and the issue has been raised again today. Let me state from the outset that the NHS remains prepared to continue with its current commitment to the hospital. Its refusal to provide the support that was requested immediately before Christmas related to serious concerns about the additional volume required, which was at a price and through a process that could not be defended in terms of accountability in the use of public money. Officials from both the Department of Health and the strategic health authority have held discussions with hospital representatives for a number of weeks, and all parties will continue to hold discussions with the hospital and with the liquidator. I can assure the hon. Gentlemen that there remains—
The motion having been made after Seven o'clock, and the debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
- Adjourned at ten minutes to Eight o'clock.
| Index | Home Page |