HC Deb 12 December 1983 vol 50 cc665-6
14. Mr. Wigley

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has received from the Gwynedd area health authority concerning his financial allocation to that authority for 1984–85; and if he will discuss with the area health authority the consequences of this allocation on the maintenance and development of health care.

Mr. Wyn Roberts

The Department has recently received a letter from the chairman of Gwynedd health authority regarding resource planning assumptions for the 10 years from 1984–85, and I shall let the hon. Member have a copy of the reply. My right hon. Friend has not yet decided the allocations to individual health authorities for 1984–85.

Mr. Wigley

Will the Minister confirm that that reply contains a refusal to implement the cuts being demanded by the Welsh Office? Is he aware that, on the basis of the notional combined capital and revenue allocations issued by the Welsh Office to the Gwynedd area health authority, that authority will be facing a recurring deficiency of £1.5 million a year and that that would mean either the mothballing of every capital development for 10 years, including hospitals in Llandudno, northern Anglesey, Dwyfor, north Merioneth and the Caernarvon area or, alternatively, mothballing provisions for geriatric and psychiatric facilities in the new district hospital at Bangor? In those circumstances, will the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether those notional figures are definite for the next two years or whether they will be withdrawn by the Welsh Office?

Mr. Roberts

The hon. Gentleman is unnecessarily spreading alarm and despondency. The health authorities appear to have misinterpreted the draft guidance and the planning assumptions that we gave them. It is wrong to talk about a cut. Reports of the health authorities meeting of 28 November in the press about a £1.4 million cut are a miscalculation, based on draft guidance containing notional figures for planning purposes. The guidance and the figures are under review. The hon. Gentleman should attach no more importance to the 0.5 per cent. gross figure assumption that we have given the authorities than that it is a planning assumption.