Proceeding contribution from Graham Stuart (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 20 March 2006. It occurred during Estimates day on Department of Health.
Department of Health
We have heard an interesting series of contributions today, including that of the hon. Member for Hastings and Rye (Michael Jabez Foster), who seemed to give two speeches. One resembled a job application; the second was closer to reality. The question underlying his speech was, why did the SHA decide to top-slice by 3 per cent. his excellent local health care trust, thus calling a halt to any hope of the growth and improvement for his constituents for which he obviously devoutly wishes? The answer is that that order came from the Secretary of State; it was not dreamt up by the SHA. If Ministers have not told Back Benchers that truth, perhaps they ought to. The hon. Member for Staffordshire, Moorlands (Charlotte Atkins) is unfortunately no longer in her place. She made what is probably the most extraordinary speech I have heard in the Chamber. She appeared to be supporting the actions of her local health service that will lead to 1,000 job cuts. I realise the seriousness of my saying that, which is why I am extremely glad to have the support of other hon. Members. I would hesitate to say such a thing otherwise. It is astonishing for her to be in that position. She asked for a Rover-style bail-out. I think that the penny is finally beginning to drop, even among Labour Members, that despite the huge spending by the Government, there is a need for Rover-style bail-outs in parts of the NHS. On NHS deficits, Ministers have moved from denial to outright panic. The truth is that the NHS budget increased by 40 per cent. between 1999 and 2004. It will have tripled in cash terms, but by 2007–08 the budget will have increased in real terms by 75 per cent. There is increasing bewilderment not only in the House, but across the country about where the money has gone. The hon. Member for Southport (Dr. Pugh) asked where it had gone, as does everyone else. In 2004, it was leaked—admittedly—from the Prime Minister’s strategy unit that there had been a reduction in NHS productivity of up to 20 per cent. by 2004, despite Government spending. So Labour Members might sing the praises of the vast sums that have been spent on health care, but the truth is that productivity has fallen. It was surging in the early 1990s.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 444 c96-7
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Health services Finance Government departments NHS Public expenditure Department of Health
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-11-24 16:29:32 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_310522
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_310522
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_310522