HC Deb 25 April 1994 vol 242 cc59-60W
Mr. Cousins

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what was the underspending or overspending for each regional health authority on its 1992–93 budget, showing in each case the net contribution to such spending changes made by(a) negligence claims, (b) capital accounts and (c) general practitioner fundholders.

Mr. Sackville

The available information is shown in the table. Regional health authorities are not allowed to overspend their combined capital and revenue cash limits. In 1992–93, RHAs had general approval to carry forward up to 0.5 per cent. of their combined revenue and capital cash limits. The contribution of negligence claims and general practitioner fundholders to any underspending is not required for operational purposes, and is therefore not separately identifiable in the information available centrally. The hon. Member may wish to contact the chairmen of regional health authorities for details.

Region Total over/under(-)spend on cash limits1 £000 Over/under(-)spend on capital cash limits £000
Northern -4,000 -6,838
Yorkshire -4,000 -1,983
Trent -2,465 -269
East Anglian -3,000 -2,563
North West Thames -5,629 -1,587
North East Thames 0 -5,094
South East Thames 0 -941
South West Thames -2,000 1,334
Wessex -3,042 8,183
Oxford 0 122
South Western -7,018 -1,331
West Midlands 0 -6,114
Mersey 0 -477
North Western 0 -197
1 This column represents the cash underdrawing against the combined capital and revenue cash limit.