HC Deb 23 July 1987 vol 120 cc494-6W
Mr. Dobson

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will give for each year since 1979 (a) in both money terms and real terms the income received from private in-patients and (b) the number of such patients in each payment category.

Mrs. Currie

[pursuant to her reply, 13 July 1987, c. 375]: The available information is as follows:

Services in England under section 65 of the National Health Services Act 1977
Year In-patient cases treated1 Income (£'000) Income(£'000 in1985–86 prices)
1979–80 91,128 33,320 53,783
1980–81 98,565 42,619 57,990
1981–82 97,739 49,344 61,113
1982–83 80,686 46,164 53,319
1983–84 82,938 49,494 54,709
1984–85 77,489 48,687 51,610
1985–86 70,782 51,787 51,787

Notes:

1. In-patient cases treated (1discharges and deaths) relate to calendar years, not financial years. (Figures shown against 1979–80 is of patients for 1979, and so on.)

2. Information on income derived from annual accounts of health authorities.

3. Actual income expressed in 1985–86 prices by the use of the gross domestic product deflator.

4. Later information is not yet available.

Mr. Dobson

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what arrangements exist to ensure that no profits accrue from national charges to private patients as a result of health authorities with relatively high private patient costs opting out of the national system and establishing their own charges.

Mrs. Currie

[pursuant to her reply, 13 July 1987, c. 375]: The central list of charges for private patient treatment is calculated to recover the estimated national average full cost of treating patients in each class of hospital: no element for profit is included. No health authority, as far as is known, has opted to move entirely away from the central list of charges for 1987–88 and therefore we would not expect this year's overall income to exceed costs. We intend when preparing the central list of charges for coming years to review each time the basis on which it is calculated and will make any changes necessary to ensure that balance between cost and income is maintained.

Mr. Dobson

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will list (a) those health authorities which have chosen to set their own charges to private patients for all treatment and (b) those health authorities which have chosen to set their own charges to private patients for some treatments.

Mrs. Currie

[pursuant to her reply, 13 July 1987, c. 375]: No health authority has reported yet that it has chosen to set charges to private patients in the current financial year which differ in every respect from the central list of charges. Health authorities which are known to have set charges which differ in some respects from those in the central list are as follows:

  • Newcastle
  • North Tyneside
  • Airedale
  • Leeds Eastern
  • Cambridge
  • Huntingdon
  • Hillingdon
  • Paddington and North Kensington
  • Riverside
  • Tower Hamlets
  • Camberwell
  • Lewisham and North Southwark
  • Wandsworth
  • Aylesbury Vale
  • East Berkshire
  • West Berkshire
  • Northampton
  • Oxfordshire
  • Bristol and Western
    • 496
  • North Birmingham
  • Sandwell
  • Walsall
  • South Manchester
  • Hammersmith and Queen Charlotte's Special Health Authority
  • Moorfields Eye Hospital
  • The National Heart and Chest Hospitals
  • The National Hospitals for Nervous Diseases
  • The Royal Marsden Hospital
  • The Hospital for Sick Children