|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Pope: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) which functions of NHS Estates will remain with the Department of Health after 1 April; and which functions will transfer to other bodies; 
Mr. Hutton: The implementation framework for reconfiguring the Department's arm's length bodies, published on 30 November 2004, sets out the future arrangements for NHS Estates functions, post its dissolution.
A number of policy functions will be transferred to the Department, including Procure 21" and decontamination. Responsibility for national health service advisory services will transfer to strategic health authorities. The National Patient Safety Agency will take on the implementation of programmes concerning food and cleaning, and certain design related projects.
|Total public health expenditure (£ billion)||Total public health expenditure as a percentage of GDP|
Mr. Hutton: The audited accounts of the NHS University special health authority for the period 1 December 2003 to 31 March 2004 show expenditure of £13.3 million. The budget for the financial year 200405 is £44.6 million. Actual expenditure will only be determined once the financial year has been completed.
The NHSU remains scheduled for dissolution by July 2005. The part year cost of running the NHSU in 200506, and forecast transition costs, will be set as part of the 200506 budgets for the Department's arm's length bodies.
The Department does not hold information on the average cost per student of a course at the NHSU. Although the NHSU provides training direct to staff working in the national health service, it also provides training in partnership with a wide range of education and training providers.
Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he will publish the Government's response to the replies received on the consultation paper Proposal to Exclude Overseas Visitors from Eligibility to Free NHS Primary Medical Services". 
Mr. Hutton: We plan to publish the results of the consultation at the same time as we announce our preferred way forward. However, these proposals have highlighted some complex issues which we are now considering and we will make the planned announcement when we have resolved these.
Mr. McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the cost was of each stage of the Shipman Inquiry, broken down by main budget headings; and what the cost was of legal fees paid to each party represented. 
Mr. Hutton [pursuant to the reply, 24 February 2005, Official Report, c. 793W]: I regret that there was an error in my previous answer. The table detailing the legal fees of the represented parties funded from the inquiry's budget should have read as follows:
|Legal fees of represented parties funded by Shipman Inquiry (to 31 January 2005)||£000|
|Tameside Families Support Group||2,159|
|Detective Inspector David Smith||126.5|
|Mr. Alan Massey, funeral director||27|
|Mrs. Primrose Shipman||35|
|Market Street surgery staff||28.5|
|Dr. Alan Banks, Medical Adviser, West Pennine Health Authority||19.5|
|Tameside Register Office staff||15|
|Mrs. Christine Whitworth, executor of victim||0.4|
|Dr. Michael Overton, relative of victim||0.3|
|Mrs. Christine Schofield, housing manager at sheltered housing complex||1.4|
|Mayfair Chemists (Hyde) Ltd. and Co-op Health Care Ltd.||3.5|
Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much the Government (1) have spent on promoting public health policies aimed at protecting against skin cancer in each of the last 10 years; and how much it plans to spend in (a) 200405 and (b) 200506; 
Funding of approximately £400,000 over the next three years from March 2004 has been approved for the Cancer Research UK to run its SunSmart" sun awareness campaign on behalf of the United Kingdom health departments, following the successful launch of SunSmart" last year.
Mr. Hutton: Non-means tested national health service bursaries have been awarded to 1,514 and 1,677 Diploma in Higher Education midwifery students in the academic years 200203 and 200304 respectively.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) when the Food Standards Agency contacted the Health Protection Agency in connection with contamination of the food chain by Sudan 1 dye; and if he will make a statement; 
8 Mar 2005 : Column 1737W
(2) what discussions his Department has had with (a) the World Health Organisation and (b) the US Food and Drug Administration on contamination of UK food by Sudan 1 dye; and if he will make a statement; 
(3) what discussions his Department has had with the Institute of Grocery Distribution Emergency Planning Liaison Group about Sudan 1 dye contamination of the food chain; and if he will make a statement; 
(5) what discussions officials from (a) his Department and (b) the Food Standards Agency have had with (i) the European Commission and (ii) the Global Food Safety Initiative about contamination of the food chain by Sudan 1 dye; and if he will make a statement; 
(6) when (a) his Department and (b) the Food Standards Agency first informed (i) the British Retail Consortium, (ii) the Institute of Grocery Distribution Emergency Planning Liaison Group and (iii) individual food retailers about the risk of food contamination by Sudan 1 dye; and if he will make a statement. 
Miss Melanie Johnson [holding answer 1 March 2005]: The Food Standards Agency (FSA) contacted a wide range of stakeholders on the issue of Sudan contamination of food. No discussions were held specifically with the Institute of Grocery Distribution Emergency Planning Liaison Group.
The FSA has not contacted the Central Science Laboratory in connection with this contamination. The FSA helped fund development of cheap tests for Sudan 1 dye, working with Public Analysts Laboratories.
Officials from the FSA were first in contact with the European Commission about contamination of foods with Sudan 1 in June 2003 when instances of contamination were initially identified. This contact has continued on a regular basis regarding this contamination. The FSA has had no direct contact with the Global Food Safety Initiative.
No formal contact was made between the FSA and the Health Protection Agency over this incident of contamination of food with Sudan 1. It is the FSA's responsibility to protect public health in relation to food.
Mr. Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what forms of cancer may be caused by the Sudan 1 dye; what symptoms may be shown by those consuming the dye; and what degree of risk is associated with the dye. 
Miss Melanie Johnson: Sudan 1 can cause liver cancer in laboratory rats. Although Sudan 1 could contribute to an increased risk of cancer in humans, at the levels present in food that risk is likely to be very small. It is not possible to further quantify the risk, but experts advise that exposure should be kept as low as possible. Since Sudan 1 is not permitted for food use, it should not be present in food at all.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|