News

Hart tops UK health poll but Rushmoor comes 12th

By Phoebe Morgan
February 11, 2013

THE health of people in areas of Hampshire and Surrey is among the best in the country, according to figures from the Office of National Statistics.

Three News & Mail areas reached the top 10 in England in terms of general health, with Hart named as the local authority with the highest percentage of healthy residents.

The new data shows 88.1% of Hart’s population claimed to be in good health, and it is known to be one of the least deprived areas in the country.

Hart, which saw 91,033 people take part in the census, has double the reasons to celebrate after it was also named the most desirable place to live for the second consecutive year.

The annual Halifax quality of life survey took into account factors such as employment, housing, crime, weather and, of course, health.

Hart District Council leader, Ken Crookes, said: “I am delighted that Hart has again come out top, the results will come as no surprise to our residents.”

Another area featured in the top 10 was Guildford Borough, which includes Ash and Tongham, where 87% of 137,183 people reported being in good health.

Surrey Heath, with a population of 86,144, was ranked 10th with 86.8% of residents saying they were in good health, while 86.24% of 93,807 Rushmoor residents said the same, ranking it 12th in the country.

The statistics were released as part of a general health comparison between 2011 and 2001, and Guildford was a new entry in the top 10 healthy authorities compared to a decade ago, ranking seventh.

The comparisons between areas are based on the breakdown of general health into states of good and not good,

allowing the Government to assess which areas need help.

Councillor Crookes said he believes the main factors which contribute to Hart’s good health include the fact that levels of participation in sport and exercise are above the national average.

“As a district council we take very seriously the provision of leisure and sporting facilities and we work with the schools to make sure pupils are

fully aware of the dangers of smoking, drinking and drugs,” he added. “We visit the schools to talk with students about these issue.

“Another factor is that Hart is lucky to have very attractive countryside which encourages people to take walks – we have the Basingstoke Canal and Yateley Common for example.”

He added that these factors contribute to Hart having a higher life expectancy than the average in England, along with lower levels of childhood obesity.

The majority of authorities with the highest health ratings are also among the most advantaged in England, as shown by their index of multiple deprivation (IMD) summary score rank – which takes account of a number of interrelated local issues such as income, unemployment, access to services and the quality of the physical environment.

Hart has an IMD ranking of 326 – a stark contrast to Blackpool which has a score of just six, meaning it is a deprived area.

The statistics reveal overall that 81.4% of English people class their health as either good or very good.

The pattern of health in the nation’s districts has been maintained since 2001, with health generally being of a higher standard in London and the South East region than in Northern areas.

| Submit Comments | View Comments (4)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

Most recent user comments 4 of 4

Goes to show how vacuous these surveys are, if one lives in the area they know from their own observations how devoid from the truth they can be. This is even more pronounced when the offerings one is expected to believe come from a bank.

mai
25/02/2013 at 09:34

Thank you for your comments.

This story did not come from a press release but from Office of National Statistics data analysed by the reporter.

ONS intended the survey to be about how residents felt - deemed an important measure - rather than based on NHS figures.

And with more than 90,000 people in Hart taking part, the final figures are therefore statistically representative and of interest.

Jennifer

News & Mail

Jennifer Maxfield
18/02/2013 at 11:34

Quite correct, how people think they feel, is not a very reliable health indices.

Our scribblers need to question what they report, not regurgitate press releases and pass them off as news.

But, on a more serious note, Rushmoor has for some time been performing very badly on health indices.

http://www.gethampshire.co.uk/news/s/2095640_rushmoor_the_smoking_capital_of_the_south

Is there any surprise, look around and see the number of disgusting fast food outlets. A planning department that is only too happy to pass each and every application for yet more fast food outlets.

Islington, a little more forward thinking than Rushmoor, has taken on board government directives on health and has written into its planning policies control of fast food outlets.

All the more reason for Rushmoor to refuse the trashing of The Tumbledown pub, a c 1720s coaching inn, for a Drive-Thru McDonald's.

Health and fast food outlets is a material planning consideration.

keithpp, Farnborough
15/02/2013 at 11:21

So we're basing this judgement on whether people rate themselves as healthy? Couldn't this poll just prove that people from the south-east are more optimistic than those from elsewhere?

I don't think these results sit very well with the 2011 claim that Rushmoor is the 'smoking capital of the south' http://www.gethampshire.co.uk/news/s/2095640_rushmoor_the_smoking_capital_of_the_south

From the article "The figures are part of a worrying overall picture showing that health problems in the two towns are steadily getting worse.

"Increased levels of diabetes, smoking, drug abuse, tuberculosis and cancer are among 13 declining indicators of the health of people in Rushmoor, according to the statistics released this week by the Department of Health."

But we'll just base our claims on how people 'feel' rather than official figures from the Department of Health.