§ 6. Sir Michael Spicer (West Worcestershire) (Con)If he will publish his latest plans for the future of the health service in west Worcestershire. [169828]
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Dr. Stephen Ladyman)South Worcestershire primary care trust is responsible for commissioning health care in west Worcestershire to meet national and local health priorities. Over the current three-year period, the funding allocation to enable the PCT to achieve this will increase in cash terms by £60.6 million, or more than 30 per cent.
§ Sir Michael SpicerIs the Minister aware that South Worcestershire primary care trust is seriously concerned that it might not have sufficient funds to honour the commitments to the GP contracts arranged by the Government, let alone to service the capital requirements for the four new medical centres and two community hospitals promised in my constituency?
§ Dr. LadymanFunding in the hon. Gentleman's constituency has massively increased. If there are any concerns about what funding is to be available in the years to come, let me put them in context. In the last year 1199 of the previous Conservative Government, spending per head in his constituency was £623 In 2002–03, the last year for which we have audited outturns, it was £894, and by 2005–06 his constituents will be having £1,061 per head spent on them. There should therefore be no concerns whatsoever about having the resources to meet those obligations.
§ Mr. Michael Foster (Worcester) (Lab)Will my hon. Friend explain how the 31 per cent. increase in funding for South Worcestershire primary care trust was raised? Does he agree that, while the residents of south Worcestershire have every right to ask for more resources to be spent on our local health service, there are two residents of south Worcestershire, both of whom are Conservative Members, who have no right to call for extra money, given the way in which they voted in the House when the money was allocated?
§ Dr. LadymanMy hon. Friend is absolutely right. The huge increase in local spending resulted from this Government's decision to increase national insurance by 1 per cent. to pay for extra investment in the national health service. The Conservatives opposed that. The 70 per cent. per capita increase that I have just described would be wiped away if they ever got back into power.
§ Mr. Peter Luff (Mid-Worcestershire) (Con)Does the Minister not recognise that the Government's mismanagement of those increased resources has led to cuts in services for the primary care trust, a massive debt at the acute hospital and the prospect of all the new services that we need for GP surgeries and cottage hospitals being abandoned? We know that the extra money the PCT has is not enough to pay for the GP contract and those extra surgeries and hospitals, so will he say over what time scale those new surgeries, and the new hospital at Pershore, will be delivered?
§ Dr. LadymanThe hon. Gentleman takes my breath away: the Conservatives would not spend one penny extra on health services if they were returned to government and he voted against the increases that we are discussing. Local decisions are now being made about prioritisation, because we have decided that we cannot make all the decisions for his constituency at the centre. I am flattered that he would like me to make all the decisions for his constituency, but that simply would not be a good way of doing things, so the funding of new GP premises in his constituency will be prioritised locally, which is exactly as it should be.