|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will place in the Library a copy of the full breakdown of each primary care trusts expenditure by programme budget category for 2007-08. 
Mr. Bradshaw: Estimates of primary care trust (PCT) expenditure by programme budgeting category are not scheduled to be collected from PCTs until December 2008 and therefore are not currently available.
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what NHS (a) capital and (b) resource expenditure in (i) cash and (ii) real terms at current prices (A) on end-of-life care was in (1) 2004-05, (2) 2005-06, (3) 2006-07 and (4) 2007-08 and (B) is planned to be in (x) 2008-09 and (y) 2010-11. 
To support the development of the End of Life Care Strategy, a survey was undertaken on primary care trust expenditure on specialist palliative care services. The results of this survey were published on the Department's website on 16 July.
The End of Life Care Strategy published on 16 July sets out a clear direction for delivering and ensuring access to high quality, responsive services across all settings for all adult patients at the end of life irrespective of who or where they are. As set out in the strategy, we will be investing an additional £286 million in end of life services in the two years up to 2011.
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether moving away from block grant funding, as referred to in paragraph 24, page 64 of High Quality Care for All, Cm 7432, will entail the creation of a payment-by-results system for community services; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Bradshaw: To ensure services are commissioned and provided on a high quality, cost-effective basis, the national health service is moving increasingly to a contractual structure where the level of funding is linked to the actual performance of providers.
To support the commissioning of community services on a more effective basis, we are working with the NHS to develop effective currencies (units of payment) for these services. Only when these currencies are developed, will we be able to evaluate their robustness and suitability to underpin any national tariff for community services. This staged approach is in line with our proposals in the consultation on the Options for the Future of PbR 2008-09 to 2010-11, which has been placed in the Library.
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether it is his policy that the regional innovation funds held by strategic health authorities, as referred to on page 56 of High Quality Care for All, Cm 7432, will be ring-fenced; whether regional innovation funds will vary between each strategic health authority area; whether funding for the innovation fund will be additional funding from his Departments central budget; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The specific purpose of the regional innovation funds are to identify, grow and diffuse tomorrows best practice. All local applications for awards will be subject to assessment by an independent expert panel to ensure that the funds awarded are deployed for that purpose. The fund monies will be additional funding from the Departments central budget, and will be apportioned equally between each of the 10 strategic health authorities.
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether it is his policy that best practice tariffs, as referred to on page 55 of High Quality Care for All, Cm 7432, should adjust prices (a) up and (b) down vis-a-vis the current equivalent tariff. 
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the estimate annual cost to the public purse the new (a) medical directors, (b) clinical advisory groups and (c) quality observatories will be in each strategic health authority area. 
Mr. Bradshaw: Implementing the proposals in the final report of the NHS Next Stage Review, High Quality Care for All, is core business for the national health service. The NHS budget for England for 2008-09 is £96 billion and will rise to £110 billion by 2010-11. The proposals will be funded from within that settlement.
Mr. Bradshaw: The figures in the following table have been obtained from information contained in the database held by the Department. National health service trusts are required to report all outbreaks of fire to which the fire and rescue service attend.
|Number of incidents|
The figures may not be representative of the actual number of incidents attended by the fire and rescue services as, for example, NHS Foundation Trusts are not mandated to provide information in relation to fire incidents.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 21 May 2008, Official Report, column 371W, on the NHS: IT, on which dates resets have been applied to the contracts with (a) Fujitsu, (b) BT and (c) CSC; and what the resulting total contract value was following each reset. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The information requested is in the table. Where there are increases in the value of the reset contract when compared to the original contract value, this is due to changes or additional requirements that have been negotiated as part of the reset agreement and these have been approved through normal governance arrangements.
|Contract||Reset data||10 year contract value (£ million)|
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the (a) current and (b) projected delays are in each of the NHS organisations assigned to Fujitsus cluster under the NHS IT contract. 
Mr. Bradshaw: Information about planned and actual deployments in the area covered by the Fujitsu contract at the point of termination of the contract are shown in the table that has been placed in the Library.
It is not yet possible accurately to predict the consequential impact on deployments as a result of the termination of the contract. However, it is possible that some services, such as systems to support mental health and community health services, may in the event be delivered more quickly than was originally anticipated through existing contracts with other suppliers.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the maximum penalty that can be levied on Fujitsu as a result of the termination notice issued under the NHS IT contract is; and what the maximum Government liability is. 
Mr. Bradshaw: Financial liability for performance under the contract with Fujitsu, terminated on 28 May 2008, will ultimately be determined by agreement between the parties, or failing that by arbitration, or by a court. The contract, which was reset in September 2005, provides for caps of liability. Fujitsus liability to the Department is capped at £100 million per contract year, and an aggregate total of £500 million. The Departments liability is capped at £50 million per contract year. In both cases, the liabilities have potential to apply from the last contract reset.
Mr. Godsiff: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what the installation cost of the new version of the Connecting for Health system is; and what additional costs NHS trusts have incurred as a result of its installation; 
Mr. Bradshaw: The information requested is contained in Figure 7 on page 26 of the National Audit Office report The National Programme for IT in the NHS : Progress since 2006, which can be found at:
The National Audit Office report confirms that the National Programme for IT remains within budget and there has been no change to the original contract costs except where new or additional requirements have been included. Information on expenditure by local NHS trusts on the national programme has not in the past been collected centrally. An annual survey has sought to establish local IT expenditure but the returns, published annually, have included all NHS IT expenditure. It is proposed to collect National Programme-specific information on a sample basis.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 25 March 2008, Official Report, column 26W, on NHS: ICT, what timetable changes there have been which are not attributable to the transfer of ownership from iSoft to IBA; and to what they are attributable. 
Mr. Bradshaw: As the National Audit Office has recently reported, although deployment by local service providers has started, the completion of deployment of systems to all hospitals is likely to take some four years longer than originally planned. This delay is regrettable and is related to the scale and complexity of the task. This is because the new systems have taken longer to be developed and because they are being installed into acute hospitals that already have between 20 and 40 existing systems, built to different standards over many years. The new systems need to be made to operate seamlessly and safely with these non-standard existing systems and interfaces, with associated data cleansing and data quality requirements.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the Answer of 26 March 2008, Official Report, column 210W, on NHS: ICT, what the delivery timescales are for the Lorenzo solution to the NHS. 
Mr. Bradshaw: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 12 March 2008, Official Report, columns 475-77W to the hon. Member for South Norfolk (Mr. Bacon). I understand that the supplier of the Lorenzo software remains confident that Release 1 will be deployed into the early adopters in the summer as planned. The deployment and timetable of subsequent releases will depend to some extent on the experience of the early adopters.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the Answer of 12 March 2008, Official Report, column 476W, on NHS: ICT, where three early adopter sites are; whether release 1 of Lorenzo has been delivered; and whether development plans have been extended in light of the recent National Audit Office Report into NHS IT. 
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the Answer of 7 January 2008, Official Report, columns 123-4W, on NHS: ICT, how much capital and revenue expenditure was made by (a) local NHS organisations and (b) central NHS organisations and Connecting for Health; and what the (i) capital and (ii) revenue expenditure on IT in the NHS was in each year from 1989-90 to 2004-05 expressed as a percentage of NHS expenditure in each year. 
Mr. Bradshaw: All the information in the earlier answer relates to expenditure by NHS Connecting for Health. In the past, information on expenditure by national health service organisations on the national programme for information technology (NPfTT) has not been collected centrally. An annual survey has sought to establish local IT expenditure but the returns, published annually, have not been restricted to the National Programme for IT. It is proposed to collect the information, on a sample basis.
Information on total NHS capital and revenue expenditure on information technology is in the following tables. Information was not collected centrally for years prior to 2003-04 (capital) and 2002-03 (revenue).
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|