§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Secretry of State for Social Services (1) what information he has sought or been offered by health authorities regarding the effect of the lifting of Crown immunity; how many authorities have had to increase their expenditure on food hygiene and health and safety; and what requests for increased funding he has received as a consequence;
(2) if he will take steps to ensure that the accounting system for health authorities will enable identification of the extent to which the lifting of Crown immunity has increased hospital spending on food hygiene and health and safety in the first year without immunity;
(3) if he will request from regional health authorities information on the additional costs so far incurred or predicted in their regions because of the lifting of Crown immunity; and if he will seek a breakdown of the nature of the costs.
522W
§ Mrs. Currie[pursuant to her reply, 14 July 1987]: Central guidance has, for a number of years, indicated that health authorities are expected to establish working practices as if they were not immune from legal penalty. We are aware of a number of recent instances where authorities have, following the implementation on 7 February 1987 of Sections 1 and 2 of the National Health Service (Amendment) Act 1986, decided to adjust spending priorities and alter building programmes. Health authority procedures have also changed as a result of the Crown immunity changes: circular HC(86) advises them that an annual report on environmental health officer reports on an authority's units and action taken in response, should be taken in public session. We do not believe that a special exercise into the impact of the removal of Crown immunity from the areas in question is called for.