09 July 2004
Funding of the NHS in Scotland has already reached the European average as England strives to achieve that target, a report has disclosed.
Spending on health per head of the population in Scotland is higher than south of the border, but the report, produced by the Scottish Parliament's audit committee, shows that England is catching up.
According to figures given to MSPs, growth money now being invested in the NHS in England is higher than in Scotland, with funding increases of 35% between 2002/03 and 2005/06 compared with 29% in Scotland.
The report is the result of an investigation by the audit committee following the auditor general Bob Black's published overview of the NHS in Scotland.
The committee is critical of the management of NHS modernisation in Scotland. It questions whether the Executive's health department will be able to determine if new NHS staff contracts in Scotland are leading to improved patient services. The committee points out that higher growth money is being invested in the NHS in England to bring staffing levels and spending per head of population up to the levels in Scotland and elsewhere in Europe.
The committee also notes that the Barnett Formula should ensure funding convergence, allowing England's per capita health spend to catch up with Scotland.
According to the report, the planned per capita spending in Scotland is £1,593 in 2004/05 and £1,731 in 2005/06. This is higher than in England, where the figures are £1,396 (2004/05) and £1,532 (2005/06).
The report emphasises that Scotland's spending per head of population takes account of factors such as the country's rural characteristics and levels of deprivation.
Higher staffing levels are described as the main reason for higher spending.
Evidence given to the committee shows that Scotland had about 183.3 whole-time equivalent (WTE) doctors and 1,070 WTE nurses and midwives per 100,000 of the population, compared with 145.8 WTE doctors and 788.8 WTE nurses and midwives in England.
PFjul2004
