Skip to main content

Written Parliamentary Questions: 26th May 2006

Connecting for Health
Q:To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the status is of the Connecting for Health IT project.(John Hemming)

A:I refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 16 May 2006, Official Report, columns 939-40W. (Caroline Flint, Minister of State, Department of Health)

NHS Finances
Q:To ask the Secretary of State for Health what formula her Department uses to determine the payment made to each primary care trust under payment by results. (John Hemming)

A:Revenue allocations are made to primary care trusts (PCTs) on the basis of the relative needs of their populations. A weighted capitation formula, calculates target shares of available resources for each PCT based on the age distribution, additional need and unavoidable geographical variations in the cost of providing services. The 2006-07 allocations have been adjusted to reflect non-recurrently the transitional arrangements for PCTs to support the implementation of payment by results. (Andy Burnham, Minister of State, Department of Health)

NHS Hospital Trusts
Q:To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the Answer of 19 April 2006, Official Report, column 743W, on NHS Hospital Trusts, if she will set out the figures for fixed costs identifying those that arise in relation to private finance initiative projects.(John Hemming)

A:I refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 12 July 2005, Official Report, columns 988-89W. The table which has been placed in the Library gives the annual payments by each trust to it's private sector partner on private finance initiative schemes which have reached financial close. This table has now been updated to reflect the Barts and London Hospital and the Hull and East Yorkshire private finance initiative schemes reaching financial close since then.
(Andy Burnham, Minister of State, Department of Health)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…