Skip to main content

Written Parliamentary Questions: 10th January 2007

Dr. David Southall
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what investigations have taken place in the NHS into the research practices of Dr. David Southall.(John Hemming)

A:The Government commissioned a full review of the research arrangements at North Staffordshire hospital in 1999, in response to concerns about how research had been conducted there by Dr. David Southall, among others. The review, chaired by Professor Rod Griffiths, reported in May 2000 and the Government accepted all the recommendations of the "Report of a review of the research framework in North Staffordshire Hospital NHS Trust", The Griffiths Report. The report recommended a substantial audit of the use of continuous negative extrathoracic pressure, a research intervention, to see if claims of significant benefit or damage could be substantiated. The findings were published in The Lancet on 1 April 2006 as "Outcome after neonatal continuous negative-pressure ventilation: follow-up assessment" by Katherine Telford et al.

In its capacity as employing organisation of researchers, North Staffordshire Hospital National Health Service Trust made its own internal enquiries in order to inform its employment procedures. The reports of these internal enquiries were not placed in the public domain by the trust. (Andy Burnham, Minister of State (Delivery and Quality), Department of Health)

Doncaster Royal Infirmary
To ask the Secretary of State for Health for how many babies born at Doncaster Royal Infirmary compensation was paid for brain damage in each year between 1980 and 1989. (John Hemming)

A:This information was not collected centrally. (Andy Burnham, Minister of State (Delivery and Quality), Department of Health)

David Southall
To ask the Secretary of State for Health

(1) if she will take steps to prevent Dr. David Southall from working in NHS hospitals;

(2) what discussions her Department has had with the University Hospital of North Staffordshire on the employment of Dr. David Southall.
(John Hemming)

A:Ministers are not in a position to intervene in the employment of individual clinicians. Decisions on employment are a matter between the employing trust and the clinician.

It is for the General Medical Council to determine whether a particular doctor is fit to practise. (Rosie Winterton (Minister of State (Health Services), Department of Health)

Consultant Contracts
To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much has been received as payments for fee paying services by consultants in each NHS hospital trust in each financial year since the implementation of the contract.(John Hemming)

A:The information requested is not collected by the Department. The inclusion of fee paying services in job plans and the payments for these is a matter for agreement between employers and consultants. (Rosie Winterton, Minister of State (Health Services), Department of Health)

Children in Care
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills

(1) how many children under the age of one were taken into care in each year since 1980; and how many were subsequently returned to their birth parents;

(2) how many babies under one year old were placed in care in (a) 1996 and (b) 2006; and for what reasons.(John Hemming)

A:Information on the number of children aged under one who were taken into care on an interim or full care order or under a police or emergency protection order in each year since 1992 is shown in Table 1. This information is not available prior to 1992. Of these, 3,000 children who were taken into care aged under one subsequently returned home between 2001 and 2006 to live with parents, relatives or other person with parental responsibility (excluding residence orders and special guardianship orders). Information on whether a child returned to live with their parents, relatives or other person with parental responsibility has only been collected since 1 April 2000. There is no comparable information prior to 2000.

In the case of all children subject to a care order, the reason they have become looked after is because the courts will have taken the view that the 'significant harm' threshold set out in the Children Act 1989 had been crossed. Information on the number of children looked after by local authorities who were placed in care aged under one in 1996 and in 2006 and for what reasons, is shown in Tables 2 and 3. The 'category of need' codes record the main reason why a child is being provided with services. This provides a further insight as to why a particular child is being looked after. Information on 'category of need' was first collected in April 2000 and provides further information as to why a child is being looked after. Data on 'category of need' is not strictly comparable with the 'reason for being looked after' information that was collected prior to 1 April 2000.

[for data, follow the link, ed]
(Parmjit Dhanda, Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Education and Skills)


Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.