Skip to main content

Written Parliamentary Questions: 22nd March 2006

Results Tariff

Q: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the reasons were for the withdrawal of the national tariff for payment by results; when her Department will indicate what payment by results tariff will apply for financial year 2006–07; and if she will make a statement.(John Hemming)

A:Regrettably it was necessary to withdraw the tariff for 2006–07 in order to correct underlying errors in the calculation. We are now testing the revised tariff with the help of national health service colleagues, and will publish a corrected version as soon as possible. (Liam Byrne, Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department of Health)

NICE Appraisals

Q: To ask the Secretary of State for Health who authorised the signing of the contract between the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) and Southampton Technology Assessment Centre (SHTAC) that provides that the cost-effectiveness model prepared by SHTAC for NICE for consideration in the technology appraisal of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease cannot be disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000; and if she will make a statement. (John Hemming)

A:The contract, with the University of Southampton, for technology assessment review reports was authorised by the Department's director of research and development (R&D) and signed by an official on behalf of the Secretary of State for Health. It is a standard Departmental R&D contract, which invests intellectual property with the research contractor. Details of the relevant intellectual property policy is available on the Department's website at: www.dh.gov.uk/PolicyAndGuidance/ResearchAndDevelopment.
(Jane Kennedy, Minister of State (Quality and Patient Safety), Department of Health)

Strategic Health Authorities

Q: To ask the Secretary of State for Health

(1) how much she estimates will be top sliced from strategic health authority budgets in the year 2006–07;

(2) if she will reverse the decision to top slice primary care trust budgets to meet financial targets.(John Hemming)

A:The requirement for national health service organisations to bank reserves with their strategic health authority (SHA) was announced by the Department in "The NHS in England: the operating framework for 2006–07".

The amount of reserve to be banked and the terms of the agreement will be agreed with their SHA. SHAs are responsible for the financial management of the organisations within their area and for delivering financial planning targets agreed with the Department. Holding financial reserves is a prudent approach to financial management, so the Department is encouraging SHAs to hold reserves because it will help them deliver their financial targets.

There are no plans to top slice SHA budgets, but any net overspending by organisations within a SHA area in 2005–06 will result in a reduced allocation in 2006–07 for that SHA in line with Government resource accounting and budgeting rules on the carry forward of over and under spending. (Jane Kennedy, Minister of State (Quality and Patient Safety), Department of Health)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

The Labour Candidate's Book Promotion Tour and Why It Matters

In the 2015 General Election the Labour Candidate criticised John Hemming for having an external interest and made a pledge that she would be a "Full Time MP for Yardley and my only other job will be mom & carer ...".  Here is a copy of that pledge:


Since that point she has been working on paid Television Programmes and has also written a book. John Hemming has made no secret of the fact that he chairs the board of the company he founded in 1983. This involves one meeting a month. When he was the MP for Yardley he was a full time MP and the Job of being MP for Yardley came first. The Labour candidate has reported 1,274 hours of work other than being an MP in the two years she has been elected and her income in the last year was over £131,000.

Ignoring the question as to how she reconciles that with her "pledge" the question is raised as to what extent her external activity conflicts with the role of Member of Parliament for Yardley. She is supposed to de…