Paul Burstow

From Nhs It Info

(Difference between revisions)
Line 36: Line 36:
"To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to his answer of 24 March 2004, Official Report, column 922W, on the national programme for information technology (NPfIT), what the total projected cost was for the NPfIT when it was announced in June 2002 (a) up to March 2006 and (b) up to and beyond March 2006."
"To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to his answer of 24 March 2004, Official Report, column 922W, on the national programme for information technology (NPfIT), what the total projected cost was for the NPfIT when it was announced in June 2002 (a) up to March 2006 and (b) up to and beyond March 2006."
 +
 +
[http://www.paulburstow.org.uk/news/422.html Website: NHS Computer System Must Be On Budget, On Time and Fit For Purpose] (31 Aug 2004)
 +
 +
"This investigation into the NHS computer project is to be welcomed. When such a substantial amount of taxpayers' money is at stake it is right that the National Audit Office fulfils its role of investigating Government spending. There are huge risks involved in this IT project. Ministers must learn the lessons from past mistakes and deliver the project on time, on budget and fit for purpose. The Government owes it to patients and staff to get this right. Patients and taxpayers have seen too many broken promises and forgotten policies to trust the Government to deliver. Like many Government computer bungles in the past, this project could end up being a massive waste of taxpayers' money."
[http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmhansrd/vo041104/text/41104w14.htm#41104w14.html_wqn4 Parliamentary Question] (4 Nov 2004)
[http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmhansrd/vo041104/text/41104w14.htm#41104w14.html_wqn4 Parliamentary Question] (4 Nov 2004)

Revision as of 20:20, 22 October 2006

Paul Burstow (Sutton & Cheam, Liberal Democrat)

Parliamentary Question (11 Feb 2004)

"To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the scope of the NHS National IT programme is in relation to (a) social services departments and (b) [chemists]; and if he will make a statement."

Parliamentary Question (4 Mar 2004)

"To ask the Secretary of State for Health what restrictions have been placed on bidders for the National Programme for Information Technology in the NHS making public statements about the project; whether these restrictions are usual Government practice; and what the reasons are for the restrictions."

Parliamentary Question (4 Mar 2004)

"To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will estimate the cost of (a) training and (b) installation for the National Programme for Information Technology in the NHS; and from which budgets the funding will be taken."

Parliamentary Question (4 Mar 2004)

"To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the projected cost of the National Programme for Information Technology in the NHS was when it was originally announced; what the latest available projected cost is; and if he will make a statement."

Parliamentary Question (15 Mar 2004)

"To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list each information technology project being undertaken by his Department and its agencies including the (a) start date, (b) planned completion date, (c) current expected completion date, (d) planned cost and (e) current estimated cost; and if he will make a statement."

Parliamentary Question (24 Mar 2004)

"To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the Answer of 4 March 2004, Official Report, column 1112W, on the IT Programme, what the total projected cost of the National Programme for Information Technology was for each year when it was announced, including local and central procurement; what the latest available total projected cost is; and if he will make a statement."

Parliamentary Question (25 Mar 2004)

"To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will set out the (a) time scale, (b) funding and (c) content of his Department's plans to integrate community [chemists] into the national IT programme."

Parliamentary Question (26 Mar 2004)

"To ask the Secretary of State for Health what consultation has been undertaken with healthcare professionals before the awarding of contracts under the National Programme for Information Technology; and if he will make a statement."

Parliamentary Question (19 Apr 2004)

"To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to his answer of 24 March 2004, Official Report, column 922W, on the national programme for information technology (NPfIT), what the total projected cost was for the NPfIT when it was announced in June 2002 (a) up to March 2006 and (b) up to and beyond March 2006."

Website: NHS Computer System Must Be On Budget, On Time and Fit For Purpose (31 Aug 2004)

"This investigation into the NHS computer project is to be welcomed. When such a substantial amount of taxpayers' money is at stake it is right that the National Audit Office fulfils its role of investigating Government spending. There are huge risks involved in this IT project. Ministers must learn the lessons from past mistakes and deliver the project on time, on budget and fit for purpose. The Government owes it to patients and staff to get this right. Patients and taxpayers have seen too many broken promises and forgotten policies to trust the Government to deliver. Like many Government computer bungles in the past, this project could end up being a massive waste of taxpayers' money."

Parliamentary Question (4 Nov 2004)

"To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 14 June 2004, Official Report, column 685W to the hon. Member for Westbury (Dr. Murrison) on IT systems, if he will break down the estimated costs by (a) procurement, (b) implementation and (c) running cost; and on what assumptions the estimates were based."

Parliamentary Question (9 Nov 2004)

"To ask the Secretary of State for Health how the National Programme for IT is meeting concerns of general practitioners about (a) the change over to the new IT system and (b) the loss of IT systems in which local GP practices have previously invested."

Personal tools