asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether the booklet "Health Care and its Costs" takes account of the demographic factors when assessing growth.

Yes, Sir. "Health Care and its Costs" describes fully the impact on the Health Service of the rising proportion of old and very old people in the population between 1971–72 and 1981–82; and of changes in the birth rate. During that period the number of people aged 65 and over rose by 16 per cent., and the number of people in their mid-70s and beyond rose by about 25 per cent. The birth rate fell considerably to 1977, rose somewhat in the next three years, and dropped slightly in 1981. The document explains how hospital and community health services were expanded to meet the needs of the growing numbers of old people, and how maternity services have responded to the birth rate change.

Is this not a political document that is designed to make the Government's performance on health finance more acceptable? Would not any demographer inside or outside the Chamber consider some of these statistics slightly spurious? If it is a political document, as many people think, why has it been paid for by the Government, and not by Conservative Central Office?

With great respect to the hon. Gentleman, the document to which he refers covers the period from 1971 to 1981. It may have slipped his memory that during that period a Labour Government were in power. It is true that I cannot avoid uncomfortable facts for the hon. Gentleman, such as the Labour Government's cut in capital spending in the mid-1970s. The document is an objective description of what has taken place inside the Health Service and should be treated in that way.

In view of the answer that the Department of Health and Social Security gave me that statistics available in terms of projections give a far more accurate assessment of the population in growth areas than the out-of-date statistics currently used in RAWP calculations, will my right hon. Friend move towards these more accurate figures?

That subject is kept constantly under review. I am aware of the concern expressed by my hon. Friend about his area, and clearly there are other similar areas. However, the Government will keep that under review.

Why do the figures stop with the year 1981–82? Why was it not possible to bring them up to date to take account of the changes up to 1982–83?

Because the 1981 figures are the last full figures that the Government have.