Proceeding contribution from Andy Burnham (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 12 March 2007. It occurred during Estimates day on NHS Deficits.
NHS Deficits
It says in my notes that I should congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley (Mr. Barron) on securing the debate. However, when I settled down yesterday afternoon with a file on NHS deficits, I nearly scored that bit out. However, he did save me from Watford versus Plymouth, so perhaps he did me a favour in the end. We have had a very good debate. The Health Committee, which is chaired by my right hon. Friend, has produced an extremely comprehensive report on deficits in the national health service. I put on record the fact that we value his contribution and that of his colleagues on the Committee, many of whom are in the Chamber and have contributed intelligently to the debate. As we said in our official response to the report, we are pleased that many of the Committee’s recommendations resonate firmly with the actions that the Department already has in hand to improve financial management both centrally and throughout the NHS. We believe that those actions will lead to a sustained return to financial health by the end of this year. May I begin by answering a question put by several hon. Members? We have heard the refrain, ““Where has the money gone?”” from the hon. Members for Hemel Hempstead (Mike Penning), for Romsey (Sandra Gidley), for Peterborough (Mr. Jackson) and for South Cambridgeshire (Mr. Lansley), so let us talk about where the money has gone. I accept that Health Ministers often speak at the Dispatch Box about the new buildings that we have put in place in the NHS, but I noted that during the long contribution made by the hon. Member for Peterborough, he did not mention once the new private finance initiative scheme that is going forward in his constituency. It seemed that the good things were miles from the thoughts of Conservative Members and that they did not want to give credit for anything that had happened. We often talk about more staff, better pay for staff and more operations. All those things are justified, but the crucial thing that matters is the relative improvement that we are securing to the health of people not only in the more deprived parts of the country, but throughout the whole country. Let us consider the coronary heart disease mortality rate among males. When we came into government, 126.6 people per 100,000 population died from CHD before they were 75. The rate in England is now 74.5. That represents a huge improvement throughout the country, and the improvements in some of the more deprived parts of the country have been even greater—[Interruption.] Conservative Members should listen before dishing out criticisms and comments.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 458 c83
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Staff Audit Health services Finance Expenditure Health authorities NHS Recruitment Public expenditure Private finance initiative Primary care trusts Redundancy Department of Health Health Committee
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-11-24 10:43:34 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_384264
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_384264
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_384264