Asked by: Anne Marie Morris (Conservative - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of the implications for its policies of the recommendations outlined in the all-party Parliamentary group on rural health and social care's report on rural health provision in England.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
We welcome the All-Party Parliamentary Group’s report, in particular its focus on health disparities and the experiences of rural communities. We plan to publish a health disparities white paper later this year which will set out measures to address health disparities and its causes, including those linked to geography. While there is no specific team within the Department solely focused on rural health, all policy teams are encouraged to embed consideration of rural health provision in policy development and delivery.
Asked by: Anne Marie Morris (Conservative - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many staff in his Department have roles with a specific focus on rural health.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
We welcome the All-Party Parliamentary Group’s report, in particular its focus on health disparities and the experiences of rural communities. We plan to publish a health disparities white paper later this year which will set out measures to address health disparities and its causes, including those linked to geography. While there is no specific team within the Department solely focused on rural health, all policy teams are encouraged to embed consideration of rural health provision in policy development and delivery.
Asked by: Anne Marie Morris (Conservative - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment his Department has made of the implications for its policies of the recommendations of the all-party Parliamentary group on rural health and social care's report on rural health provision in England.
Answered by Rebecca Pow - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
I welcome the all-party Parliamentary group’s report on rural health provision. There are two recommendations that make direct reference to Defra: recommendation 1 on defining rurality and recommendation 2 on identifying health inequalities.
The official rural definition is strictly a statistical one – the rural-urban classification. Working with the Office for National Statistics (ONS), Ordnance Survey and other relevant departments this will be revised once data from the 2021 Census become available. The classification is not prescriptive, and departments have always been able to define rurality flexibly as appropriate for the policy or budgetary context, taking account of relevant factors.
On identifying health inequalities, one of the pillars of the Levelling Up White Paper published on 2 February is that the Government will transform its approach to data. As part of this, the Government Statistical Service Subnational Data Strategy aims to improve the UK’s subnational data, mapping local geographies and helping improve transparency and accountability to the public. Defra will be working with the ONS and other departments to implement this strategy.
Asked by: Anne Marie Morris (Conservative - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what his timetable is for announcing the next funding settlement between the Government and the Post Office.
Answered by Paul Scully
A settlement letter is expected by the end of the financial year.
Asked by: Anne Marie Morris (Conservative - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, for what reason Devon was not selected as one of the 55 Education Investment Areas despite ranking within the top 55 areas with the lowest Standardised KS2 and KS4 composite measure.
Answered by Robin Walker
The methodology used to select Education Investment Areas (EIA) and Opportunity Areas (OA) is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/social-mobility-and-opportunity-areas.
Areas selected as EIAs are the local authorities that are either: (i) in the bottom 50 ranked local authorities on key stage 2 and key stage 4 attainment; or (ii) contain an OA or areas previously identified for additional school improvement support. Devon was ranked 55 on this list, so was not included.
Asked by: Anne Marie Morris (Conservative - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, for what reason local authorities with higher attainment outcomes designated as Opportunity Areas were chosen as Education Investment Areas ahead of local authorities with lower attainment outcomes.
Answered by Robin Walker
The methodology used to select Education Investment Areas (EIA) and Opportunity Areas (OA) is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/social-mobility-and-opportunity-areas.
EIAs were principally selected based on poor attainment across key stage 2 (KS2) and key stage 4 (KS4). To ensure the department’s approach to levelling up is consistent with existing policies to improve outcomes in specific places, EIAs also included any local authority which contains an existing OA or an area previously identified for additional school improvement support.
Areas selected as EIAs are the local authorities that are either: (i) in the bottom 50 ranked local authorities on KS2 and KS4 attainment; or (ii) contain an OA or areas previously identified for additional school improvement support.
Asked by: Anne Marie Morris (Conservative - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of the implications on workforce of the expiration of the temporary covid-19 measures allowing retired NHS staff to return to work without pension penalties.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The pension measures in Section 45 of the Coronavirus Act 2020 allow retired and partially retired staff to return to work or increase their working commitments without the risk of having their pension benefits suspended.
Since March 2020, the 16 hour rule, abatement of ‘Special Class’ members of the 1995 Section (staff with the reserved right to retire at 55 years old without an actuarial reduction) and abatement of draw down members in the 2008 Section and 2015 Scheme have been suspended. Abatement does not apply generally in the scheme, but it does apply to ‘Special Class’ staff who return to work between the ages 55 to 60 years old. Abatement recognises that ‘Special Class’ members have a significant benefit not available to other staff in the National Health Service. Once abatement is resumed, this closed cohort will still be able to continue working for the NHS, typically at least half time. The vast majority of staff are not subject to abatement after taking their pension.
These measures are due to expire on 24 March 2022, with the NHS Pension Scheme rules returning to business as usual arrangements. The Department is keeping this under review.
Asked by: Anne Marie Morris (Conservative - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether he has made an assessment of the impact of the end of the temporary suspension in March 2022 of pension penalty protections introduced in respect of the NHS pension scheme during the covid-19 outbreak on senior doctors’ decisions on (a) early retirement and (b) reductions in their working hours.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Three rules were suspended by Section 45 of the Coronavirus Act 2020. Staff in the 1995 section no longer had to restrict hours worked to no more than 16 hours a week for four weeks after taking their pension. ‘Special Class’ members and Mental Health Officer (MHOs) of the 1995 Section (staff with the reserved right to retire at 55 years old without an actuarial reduction) no longer would have their pension abated so that pension plus current earnings could not exceed earnings before retirement. Staff in the 2008 and 2015 schemes no longer had to reduce their pensionable earnings by 10% on drawing down some of their pension.
These rule changes affected only retired staff and therefore did not impact the early retirement of doctors. The vast majority of doctors, other than a small number of MHOs in post before 6 March 1995, are not ‘Special Class’ members and are not benefiting from Section 45 and will be unaffected when it is withdrawn. Doctors who have retired and returned to the National Health Service have benefited from the suspension of the 16 hour rule since March 2020 and have been able to immediately return to full-time work.
Asked by: Anne Marie Morris (Conservative - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will make an assessment of the potential merits of a pension scheme for higher paid NHS staff that is similar to the Judicial Pensions Scheme 2022.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The NHS Pension Scheme provides generous retirement benefits for staff and for the vast majority of members their pension savings are tax free.
The unique circumstances of judiciary appointments mean that it is necessary to reform their pension arrangements. Judges are not able to work in private practice after taking up office and many judges have a significant decrease in pay to join the judiciary. The Government is therefore committed to introducing a reformed judicial pension scheme. Such a scheme would not benefit the vast majority of National Health Service staff, as members would receive no tax relief on their contributions.
Asked by: Anne Marie Morris (Conservative - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, how much and what proportion of the Welcome Back Fund has been distributed to local authorities.
Answered by Neil O'Brien
Our £106 million Welcome Back Fund (WBF) is playing a vital role in supporting local authorities and their communities to bounce back from the Covid-19 pandemic.
This funding, which is available until 31 March 2022, has been allocated to 314 local authorities in England on a per capita basis. Councils can incur expenditure on eligible activities and claim up to the full amount of their allocation from Government in quarterly arrears. It is up to places to decide what to spend this funding on, having regard to the Fund's eligibility criteria.
More information, including a list of all local authority funding allocations, can be found in the WBF Guidance and FAQs on GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/welcome-back-fund.