HC Deb 24 July 2000 vol 354 cc412-3W
Mr. McNamara

To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list those Health Action Zones that underspent on their 1999–2000 budgets, indicating in(a) percentage and (b) real terms the degree of underspend. [131067]

Mr. Hutton

The table shows that all Health Action Zones underspent against the 1999–2000 allocations. Information on how much of this is committed to projects in 2000–01 is not held centrally.

HAZ HAZ allocation 1999–20001 HAZ expenditure 1999–20002 Underspend against allocation—real terms2 Underspend as a percentage of allocation
Second Wave
Tees 3,132 1,789 1,344 43
Wakefield 1,666 1,335 331 20
Leeds 3,610 2,693 917 25
Hull and East Riding 2,824 1,987 837 30
Merseyside 7,445 6,338 1,107 15
Bury and Rochdale 2,004 1,906 98 5
Nottingham 3,105 1,554 1,551 50
Sheffield 2,923 2,292 631 22
Leicester City 1,502 1,100 402 27
Wolverhampton 1,388 632 756 54
Walsall 1,376 1,275 102 7
North Staffordshire 2,008 698 1,310 65
Cornwall and Isles of Scilly 2,288 2,105 163 8
Camden and Islington 2,372 1,056 1,316 56
Brent 1,294 1,017 277 21
Second Wave Total 39,084 27,778 11,306 29
Sub-total 85,701 58,113 27,587 32
Central and other innovations 1,700 1,700 0 0
Grand Total 87,994 59,814 27,587 32
1 HAZ funding comes from a number of sources as follows:
(a) The HAZ central budget comprising three elements:
(i) programme funding for joint projects with other agencies;
(ii) innovations funding;
(iii) central and other innovations;
(b) Funding for smoking cessation services.
(c) Funding for drugs prevention services for First Wave HAZs.
(d) Targeted funds for deprived areas allocated to HAs which include HAZs within their boundaries.
2 Figures reported by HAZs at the end of 1999–2000.

Note:

Figures are in £000s.