Proceeding contribution from Andrew Murrison (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 22 February 2007. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Public Health (England).
Public Health (England)
This is an important point of debate. Given the argument that the Minister is pursuing, why is the National Treatment Agency effectively ring-fencing money for one particular aspect of health care, namely, substance abuse of a particular kind? If money can be ring-fenced for that—and successfully so—should it not be ring-fenced in the wider public health arena?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 457 c469
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Children Alcoholic drinks Disadvantaged Health services Finance Food Labelling Health education General practitioners NHS Primary care trusts Nutrition Staff Obesity Tobacco Smoking Teenage pregnancy Exercise Sexual and reproductive health Public health
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:21:11 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_379189
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_379189
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_379189