HC Deb 05 November 1996 vol 284 cc1019-21
3. Sir Sydney Chapman

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what was the number of in-patient and out-patient treatments in the national health service in 1978–79; and what were the figures in 1995–96. [611]

The Secretary of State for Health (Mr. Stephen Dorrell)

In-patient acute treatments rose from 5.1 million patients in 1978 to 9.2 million in 1995–96. That represents an increase in the number of acute patients treated of 80 per cent. in 17 years. In the same period, out-patient attendances increased from 28.4 million to 35.9 million.

Sir Sydney Chapman

I warmly welcome that staggering increase in the number of patient treatments. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that it is due to the Government raising expenditure on the NHS from £8 billion in 1979 to about £40 billion this year; and to the Government ensuring that those ever-increasing resources have been used in the most effective way for the benefit of patients? Will my right hon. Friend therefore accept that the figures that he has given prove beyond doubt that the Government's NHS reforms have been on the right lines?

Mr. Dorrell

My hon. Friend is exactly right on both counts. We give two pledges to the NHS, neither of which is given by the Labour party. The first is a commitment to insist that the health service is efficiently managed. The second is the Prime Minister's guarantee to raise the real resources available for health care in the service year by year by year. That is a pledge which the Labour party refuses to give.

Mr. Cunliffe

Is the Minister aware that, since the health authority closed down the accident and emergency department of Leigh infirmary—it was eventually replaced by a minor injuries unit that opened 24 hours a day—the authority has reneged on its assurances of a 24-hour service and now, in a disgraceful cost-cutting exercise, proposes to close the unit between 10 pm and 8 am? What does he propose to do to safeguard the welfare of the affected patients?

Mr. Dorrell

I give the pledge that we shall continue to increase the resources available for the treatment of patients in the health service. I also give the pledge that we shall continue to insist that those resources are used in the way that is most efficient and gives the most effective health care to the patients in the hon. Gentleman's constituency and in every other constituency.

Sir Irvine Patnick

I have made my right hon. Friend aware of the day case centre at the Royal Hallamshire hospital in Sheffield. Are not the staff to be congratulated on the way in which the unit functions? If that unit were copied throughout the country, would that not reduce waiting lists and waiting times? Will the Secretary of State take an opportunity to visit the unit and see how its wonderful facilities are made available to everyone through the national health service?

Mr. Dorrell

My hon. Friend is on to an important point. I certainly hope to visit my hon. Friend's constituency, but my problem is that day case units are becoming available throughout the country. Were I to undertake to visit every day care unit, I should have to visit every constituency represented by hon. Members on both sides of the House.

The units to which my hon. Friend referred have, over the past 17 years, seen an increase in the number of patients treated as day cases from 500,000 in 1978–79 to 2.8 million last year—a fivefold increase. My hon. Friend is right to say that that is a more efficient way of treating them, but it is a better treatment from the patient's point of view. A patient does not want to be in hospital If the option is to be home by tea time. That is what day case treatment offers them.

Ms Jowell

Can we get behind the Secretary of State's favourite barrage of statistics? Will he confirm that a patient who is treated and discharged too early and who has to be readmitted counts as two finished consultant episodes; whereas a patient who stays in hospital until he or she has recovered and is able to cope at home counts as only one? The first course is bad for the patient, but good for the statistics, while the second is good for the patient, but bad for the statistics. Does that not show the absurdity of using finished consultant episodes as a measurement of performance in the NHS?

Mr. Dorrell

It is the hon. Lady who is quibbling about statistics. She quibbles because she refuses to give a pledge parallel to the one given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister—the pledge to ensure that health service funding rises in real terms year by year by year. That is the question that hon. Members on the Labour Front Bench have to answer, but they resolutely refuse to address the issue.

Mr. John Marshall

Does my right hon. Friend remember the statement of the right hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook) that the test of the NHS reforms would be whether they resulted in the treatment of more or fewer patients? Have we not passed the Cook test with flying colours?

Mr. Dorrell

My hon. Friend is precisely right. In 1991, the Cook test was set by the right hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook). It was: would the Government accept the test and judge the success of the reforms on whether the health service treated more patients? The fact is that, since 1990, the health service has grown by one third in terms of the number of acute patients treated.

Mr. Skinner

The Minister cooked the books.

Mr. Dorrell

The Cook test that the hon. Gentleman should apply has been passed with flying colours by the NHS under this Government.