Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.
These initiatives were driven by Lord Balfe, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.
A Bill to amend the Pensions Act 2004 and the Companies Act 2006 to remove the cap on compensation payments under the Pension Protection Fund and to require the approval of pension scheme trustees and the Pensions Regulator for the distribution of dividends.
A Bill to make provision about the holding of referenda in relation to voting systems in local government elections.
A Bill to make provision to allow European Union citizens who are resident in the United Kingdom to vote in parliamentary elections and to become members of Parliament; and for connected purposes.
Lord Balfe has not co-sponsored any Bills in the current parliamentary sitting
The strong advice to all members is that debating the drivers behind specific security projects, and the plans to address security weaknesses, should not be raised in any public forum as to do so may heighten the security threat.
Members are always welcome to contact the Director of Security to discuss any security-related concerns privately.
The Peers’ Portico project has been approved by the Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the House who, as Accounting Officers and Corporate Officers, are legally accountable for ensuring the safety of all members, staff and visitors on the Parliamentary Estate as a whole. Before coming to their decision, they considered professional security advice, the external professional security validation of that advice, and the views of members on the Commission, the Services Committee, the Finance Committee and members more widely. Ultimately it is not the House that makes the final decision because security is a bicameral issue, and legal responsibility for safety sits with the Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the House.
As set out in my previous reply there are no current plans to make the facility available more widely on similar terms to Members of the House. The Noble Lord is welcome to submit his proposal directly to the Commission, should he so wish.
Deputy Speakers and Deputy Chairmen on duty in the Chamber are able to take a taxi when they are on duty and the House sits past 10.40pm, with costs covered up to a linear distance of 25 miles. The same limit applies to staff late night travel. There are no current plans to make the facility available more widely on similar terms to Members of the House.
In December 2020 the Liaison Committee published the final recommendations from its extensive review of investigative and scrutiny committee activity. These recommendations were agreed by the House on 13 January 2021 and a number of new sessional committees were subsequently appointed on 14 April. These include a Select Committee on European Affairs, with orders of reference which include consideration of matters relating to the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European Union and European Economic Area. There are no current plans to recommend the appointment of further committees to consider relations with the European Union.
On 31 January 2020, the date the United Kingdom ceased to be a Member State of the European Union, the UK Parliament ceased to be an EU ‘national Parliament’, except for certain limited purposes set out in Article 128(2) of the UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement.
Up until this point designated staff of the House of Lords and House of Commons, as representatives of an EU ‘national Parliament’, were granted access to the European Parliament, along with office accommodation and other benefits. As the noble Lord points out, Norway has since 2012 been the only non-EU Member State to be granted comparable access thus far.
Despite the UK’s changed status after 31 January 2020, the European Parliament continued to afford access to House staff for the duration of the transition period, and on 22 December 2020 the Secretary General of the European Parliament offered “continued hosting” for the two Houses’ representatives after the end of the transition period, subject to “appropriate practical arrangements in the light of the evolving relations between the European Union and the United Kingdom”.
To date, no such practical arrangements have been required, given the guidance agreed by the House of Lords Commission in March 2020, which strongly discouraged overseas travel. Since that date there has been no committee or staff travel to Brussels, and the House’s representative has therefore undertaken the role remotely, using digital tools.
The House of Lords Commission continues to review the guidance on overseas travel, taking account of Government advice and the wider public health situation, and decisions on staff travel to Brussels will be taken as and when the guidance is updated.
Since the pandemic began, Civil Servants have been delivering the Government’s priorities from home and in the workplace. The Civil Service continues to follow the latest Government guidance and departments have plans to move gradually to hybrid working.
Pay below the Senior Civil Service is delegated to departments. London pay levels reflect the need to recruit in the London market, not simply the costs incurred by staff for working in the capital. There are no plans to change terms and conditions around London based pay.
The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have therefore asked the Authority to respond.
14 January 2021
Dear Lord Balfe,
As National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority, I am responding to your Parliamentary Question asking what is the average age of people who have had COVID-19 cited as a contributory cause of death in the last four weeks; how many such people were (1) 0-18, (2) 19-30, (3) 31-40, (4) 41-50, (5) 51-60, (6) 61-70, (7) 71-80, (8) 81-90, and (9) over 90, years old at the time of death; and in each cohort how many such deaths occurred in people with underlying health conditions (HL11720).
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) is responsible for publishing numbers of deaths registered in England and Wales. Information on deaths involving COVID-19 and pre-existing health conditions was published in July[1]. As part of deaths registered weekly in England and Wales[2], the ONS produces the number of deaths involving COVID-19 by age group. Table 1 provides the number of deaths involving COVID-19 by age group in the last four weeks.
Table 2 is the mean and median age at death of those whose death involves COVID-19 and for all deaths in the last 4 weeks.
Table 3 shows deaths involving COVID-19 where there is no pre-existing condition against total COVID-19 deaths for that age cohort. Data is available from March 2020 to June 2020, however we will be resuming publication of this data within the next 6 weeks.
Yours sincerely,
Professor Sir Ian Diamond
Table 1: Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales involving COVID-19 by age group, Week ending 4 December to Week ending 25 December 2020[3],[4],[5],[6],[7]
Week number | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | |
Week ended | 04-Dec-20 | 11-Dec-20 | 18-Dec-20 | 25-Dec-20 | |
Deaths by age group | |||||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
1-4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
5-9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
10-14 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
15-19 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
20-24 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
25-29 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | |
30-34 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | |
35-39 | 9 | 7 | 6 | 5 | |
40-44 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 12 | |
45-49 | 21 | 19 | 25 | 21 | |
50-54 | 41 | 37 | 43 | 41 | |
55-59 | 62 | 65 | 75 | 63 | |
60-64 | 105 | 126 | 119 | 107 | |
65-69 | 170 | 154 | 177 | 160 | |
70-74 | 288 | 258 | 252 | 275 | |
75-79 | 414 | 400 | 388 | 397 | |
80-84 | 509 | 492 | 544 | 583 | |
85-89 | 598 | 570 | 609 | 605 | |
90+ | 599 | 611 | 736 | 639 | |
Source: ONS |
Table 2: Average age of deaths registered weekly in England and Wales, Week ending 4 December to Week ending 25 December 20203,4,5,6,7
Week number | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | |
Week ended | 04-Dec-20 | 11-Dec-20 | 18-Dec-20 | 25-Dec-20 | |
All deaths | Median age | 81 | 81 | 82 | 82 |
Mean age | 78 | 78 | 79 | 79 | |
Deaths involving COVID-19 | Median age | 83 | 83 | 83 | 83 |
Mean age | 81 | 81 | 81 | 81 |
Source: ONS
Table 3: Number of deaths involving COVID-19, by age group and whether a pre-existing condition was present, England and Wales, deaths occurring between March and June 2020[8],[9],[10],[11],[12]
Age | All deaths involving COVID-19 | COVID-19 deaths with pre-existing condition | COVID-19 deaths with no pre-existing condition |
0-44 | 542 | 441 | 101 |
45-49 | 457 | 366 | 91 |
50-54 | 847 | 724 | 123 |
55-59 | 1,453 | 1,226 | 227 |
60-64 | 2,065 | 1,835 | 230 |
65-69 | 2,791 | 2,498 | 293 |
70-74 | 4,627 | 4,220 | 407 |
75-79 | 6,693 | 6,174 | 519 |
80-84 | 9,588 | 8,889 | 699 |
85-89 | 10,327 | 9,525 | 802 |
90+ | 10,945 | 9,961 | 984 |
[1]https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19englandandwales/deathsoccurringinjune2020
[3] Deaths where COVID-19 (ICD10 codes U07.1 and U07.2) are mentioned anywhere on the death certificate
[5] Does not include deaths where age is either missing or not yet fully coded.
[6] Does not include deaths of those resident outside England and Wales or those records where the place of residence is either missing or not yet fully coded.
[8] Figures include deaths of non-residents
[9] Figures are provisional
[10] Based on deaths involving COVID-19 (ICD-10 codes U07.1 and U07.2) rather than deaths where COVID-19 was the underlying cause of death
[11] Deaths occurring between March and June 2020 rather than deaths registered between March and June 2020
[12] Including deaths registered up until 4 July 2020.
Our collective understanding of the virus, and how it spreads, has vastly improved since the initial wave of infections. As a responsible government, we have been planning and continue to prepare for a wide range of scenarios, including the reasonable worst case scenario. In the coming months, we will continue to assess what the UK can learn from other nations, and carry out a series of exercises, to test the Government’s winter plans, including for a reasonable worst case scenario and to ensure effective coordination between departments and with the devolved administrations.
In May, we published the UK Government’s COVID-19 recovery strategy. This was updated in July, including details on planning for the winter. Our planning assumptions and guidance are kept under review and amended as the scientific and medical advice develops.
The Government is reviewing the current law on units of measurement and has gathered information from the consultation ‘Choice on units of measurement: markings and sales’. A government response will be published in due course.
The Government recognises that metric units remain essential for international trade. Any legislative changes would require an impact assessment, including an equality impact assessment.
The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill will ensure crucial public services such as rail, ambulances, and fire services maintain a minimum service during industrial action, reducing risk to life and ensuring the public can still get to work.
The Government is not planning to imminently introduce any further primary legislation in this area. The Government continually keeps the UK’s trade union legislation under review.
The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill will ensure crucial public services such as rail, ambulances, and fire services maintain a minimum service during industrial action, reducing risk to life and ensuring the public can still get to work.
The Government is not planning to imminently introduce any further primary legislation in this area. The Government continually keeps the UK’s trade union legislation under review.
Statistics on trade union membership, including proportion of public and private sector employees who belong to a union are published on Gov.uk.
Trade unions can have a constructive role to play in representing their members’ interests. Strikes, however, should always be a last resort given the impact that they have on the public and we would always encourage unions to exhaust all other avenues to resolve disputes before taking this step.
The legislation repealing regulation 7 applies to all employers in all sectors. It came into force on 21st July after debates in both houses of Parliament. It gives employers the choice to work with employment businesses to find suitably qualified staff when they are facing industrial action and offers agency workers the freedom to accept roles replacing staff on strike if they wish. It does not affect the ability of workers to go on strike and existing protections for striking workers are maintained. It does, however, balance the right to strike against the right of employers and third parties not to suffer disproportionate disruption. This is particularly important as we continue to recover from the pandemic and are faced with what are global economic challenges.
We welcome Ofcom’s independent decision to revoke RT’s licence to broadcast in the UK so that President Putin can no longer spread his regime’s lies on UK television. The Russian authorities must not be allowed to spread their insidious propaganda in the UK.
We will not hesitate to take any necessary action against any key individuals and bodies responsible for disseminating these lies and are exploring all options further to choke off this material in the UK.
The department did not undertake a further formal evaluation of the Union Learning Fund following the evaluation by Exeter University.
As part of the Spending Review process, the Department has assessed its priorities across all its objectives, including considering the evidence from the Unionlearn evaluation. The decision to discontinue funding for Unionlearn beyond this financial year reflects the consolidation of investment to support retraining in major new programmes, including the National Skills Fund, which support progression to higher levels of attainment.
The government has taken the decision not to continue to provide grant funding to Unionlearn in the next financial year. This decision should not be seen in isolation but as part of the department’s overall plans for improving the skills offer.
This was a difficult decision. However, we need to prioritise how we use our resources in these challenging times and have decided to concentrate on a number of major investments in further education. The government has announced it will introduce a £2.5 billion National Skills Fund to help adults get the skills they need. My right hon. Friend, the Prime Minister, as part of his Lifetime Skills Guarantee, recently announced that for adults, who do not currently have a level 3 qualification, we will be fully funding their first full level 3, focusing on the valuable courses that will help them get ahead in the labour market. The offer will be funded from the National Skills Fund and offered from April 2021.
My right hon. Friend, the Prime Minister, also recently announced digital bootcamps to support local regions and employers to fill in-demand vacancies by providing valuable skills. Adults in the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, Lancashire, and Liverpool City Region can now register their interest to take part in the digital bootcamps. In early 2021, the digital bootcamps will also be available in Leeds City Region, Heart of the South West, Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. We are planning to expand the bootcamps to more of the country from Spring 2021 and we want to extend this model to include other technical skills training.
Further plans for the National Skills Fund will be announced in due course.
Alongside the National Skills Fund, the department has been working to provide further support in response to the impacts of the COVID-19 outbreak. In his Summer Economic Update, my right hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, announced investment of over £500 million to deliver a package of support for people to access the training and develop the skills they will need to go on to high-quality, secure and fulfilling employment. The Skills Recovery Package included:
In addition, the recently announced expansion of The Skills Toolkit means that people can now choose from over 70 courses, covering digital, adult numeracy, employability and work readiness skills, which have been identified as the skills employers need the most. These courses will help people stay in work or take up new jobs and opportunities.
The government appreciates the importance of adult education to improving people’s life chances. We will continue to explore options within adult education to aid the post COVID-19 recovery.
The government did not consult with any outside bodies prior to making the decision not to continue to provide funding for the Union Learning Fund after 31 March 2021.
We have made no commitment to funding beyond this date and have always been clear any future funding would depend on the Government’s Spending Review. The decision to cease funding after April 2021 has been communicated at this stage in the Spending Review process in order to give a greater period of notice.
The government did not consult with any outside bodies prior to making the decision not to continue to provide funding for the Union Learning Fund after 31 March 2021.
We have made no commitment to funding beyond this date and have always been clear any future funding would depend on the Government’s Spending Review. The decision to cease funding after April 2021 has been communicated at this stage in the Spending Review process in order to give a greater period of notice.
The government did not consult with any outside bodies prior to making the decision not to continue to provide funding for the Union Learning Fund after 31 March 2021.
We have made no commitment to funding beyond this date and have always been clear any future funding would depend on the Government’s Spending Review. The decision to cease funding after April 2021 has been communicated at this stage in the Spending Review process in order to give a greater period of notice.
My noble Friend Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne was appointed Trade Envoy in July 2017 to Kazakhstan and in October 2020 the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury and Atcham, Daniel Kawczynski, was appointed Trade Envoy to Mongolia. There are no plans to appoint a Trade Envoy to Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan or Afghanistan.
My Rt Hon. Friend the Prime Minister’s Trade Envoys are drawn from both Houses and across the political spectrum. They are chosen based on relevant skills and experience required to undertake the role. This experience can be related to their assigned market or UK industry knowledge, or their Government-to-Government experience, as well as willingness and an ability to undertake some international travel. Trade Envoys are appointed by the Prime Minister, usually following a recommendation by my Rt Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Trade.
Trade Envoys engage with emerging and developing markets where substantial trade and investment opportunities have been identified by the UK Government. The appointment by the Prime Minister in January 2016 of a Trade Envoy to Taiwan was based on feedback received from the British Trade Office there and underlined the growing importance of the UK-Taiwan trade and investment relationship.
Taiwan offers opportunities for UK businesses in a number of sectors, which was highlighted during last autumn’s UK-Taiwan trade talks, including education, science and innovation. Further proof of this is the number of UK firms that are present in Taiwan.
We are constantly reviewing suitable markets to identify where the appointment of a Trade Envoy can be of greatest benefit to the trade and investment aims of the UK, with the Prime Minister making the final decision. There are no plans to appoint a Trade Envoy to the northern part of Cyprus.
Prime Minister’s Trade Envoys are drawn from both Houses and across the political spectrum. They are chosen based on relevant skills and experience required to undertake the role. This experience can be related to their assigned market or UK industry knowledge, or their Government-to-Government experience, as well as willingness and an ability to undertake some international travel.
With regard to the criteria used to determine which countries are added to the programme, I refer my noble Friend to the answer I gave to the noble Lord, Viscount Waverley, on 16 February 2021, UIN: HL13033.
Prime Minister’s Trade Envoys are drawn from both Houses and across the political spectrum. They are chosen based on relevant skills and experience required to undertake the role. This experience can be related to their assigned market or UK industry knowledge, or their Government-to-Government experience, as well as willingness and an ability to undertake some international travel.
With regard to the criteria used to determine which countries are added to the programme, I refer my noble Friend to the answer I gave to the noble Lord, Viscount Waverley, on 16 February 2021, UIN: HL13033.
Prime Minister’s Trade Envoys are drawn from both Houses and across the political spectrum. They are chosen based on relevant skills and experience required to undertake the role. This experience can be related to their assigned market or UK industry knowledge, or their Government-to-Government experience, as well as willingness and an ability to undertake some international travel.
With regard to the criteria used to determine which countries are added to the programme, I refer my noble Friend to the answer I gave to the noble Lord, Viscount Waverley, on 16 February 2021, UIN: HL13033.
The Prime Minister’s Trade Envoy programme is financially supported and managed solely by the Department for International Trade (DIT). The Department meets all travel and subsistence costs associated with the role, as well as any other incidental costs incurred by Trade Envoys to fulfil their duties. All costs incurred are subject to the Department’s guidelines, which apply to the programme’s use of public funds.
Trade Envoys work closely with colleagues in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and HM Trade Commissioners, who provide market and business intelligence and logistical support when visits are made. Trade Envoys are deployed where they can add the most value, which includes supporting Her Majesty’s Government’s wider overseas objectives when appropriate.
Any decisions by the pilot in command of an aircraft made in accordance with relevant aviation safety requirements, with regard to the safety of a particular flight, would not constitute industrial action. Such decisions are therefore outside of the scope of Part V of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and the amendments being made to that Part by the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act.
To propose any changes to the opening hours, or the closure of ticket offices, train operating companies must follow the process set out in the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement.
Train operators must consult on any proposed changes, advertising them at the relevant stations and inviting members of the public who wish to comment on the proposal to write to the relevant passenger body (either Transport Focus or London TravelWatch) within a 21-day period. Greater Anglia Railways has set out its proposals on its website.
Parliamentarians are encouraged to raise any concerns with the relevant Passenger Bodies through the established consultation process. Further detail of how to do this can be found on station posters or on the Train Operating Company websites.
Responsibility for regulating flying training in the UK rests with the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). The CAA’s approval of a flying school or training establishment as an Approved Training Organisation (ATO) are designed to provide confidence that they are able to perform their operations safely. However, as the CAA does not regulate the ongoing financial viability of flying schools or clubs, approval to conduct flight training does not imply any certification of financial stability. I have asked my officials to engage with the CAA to consider this in more detail.
Responsibility for regulating flying training in the UK rests with the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). The CAA’s approval of a flying school or training establishment as an Approved Training Organisation (ATO) are designed to provide confidence that they are able to perform their operations safely. However, as the CAA does not regulate the ongoing financial viability of flying schools or clubs, approval to conduct flight training does not imply any certification of financial stability. I have asked my officials to engage with the CAA to consider this in more detail.
As Lord Callanan stated, the Government are committed to maintaining comprehensive safety standards, including in aviation. Officials engage with industry regularly, including through the industry engagement forum, to ensure their views as to how best to use the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill to achieve this are taken into account. Moreover, officials will meet with BALPA to discuss the specific issues raised by Lord Balfe, in order to better understand concerns, and clarify the discussion had at that forum.
When the Jet Zero Council was established in July 2020, we sought to ensure that all relevant parts of the industry were represented, from airlines, airports, and aerospace manufacturers, to NGOs, academics, and start-ups.
To ensure that the Council remains at the forefront of driving zero emission transatlantic flight within a generation, we are currently reviewing the Council’s membership to ensure it reflects the expertise required to deliver this challenge. Though there will always be practical limits to the size of the Council, and we are not able to accommodate all individual requests for membership.
To support the delivery of the Jet Zero Council and allow wider participation in its work, we have established Delivery Groups focussed on Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAF) and Zero Emission Flight (ZEF), which we encourage organisations with relevant interests to engage with.
It is a matter for each country to decide on appropriate health measures and how Covid-19 tests are provided. We recognise that the cost of tests can be high. The Government is working with the travel industry and private testing providers to see how we can further reduce costs for the British public while ensuring travel is as safe as possible.
The price of tests has reduced significantly in recent weeks, bringing the UK in line with other countries, and some providers are offering testing packages for arrivals countries on the green list starting at £43. The Government is considering a range of options to lower the cost of testing, including cheaper tests being used when passengers return home.
The Government has always been clear that NHS Test and Trace tests should not be used for the purposes of international travel. This is to safeguard testing capacity.
NHS Test and Trace tests may not be used for the Test to Release for International Travel scheme. Travellers must use a test from a private testing provider on the gov.uk private providers list. NHS Test and Trace is not on this list, and for this reason, does not meet the minimum standards required to legally release a traveller from self-isolation upon providing a negative result.
NHS Test and Trace does not provide a result notification in a format that would be acceptable to meet the new pre-departure testing requirements, and as such, will not be accepted for travel to England.
Lateral Flow Tests may meet the minimum standards of more than 80% sensitivity and more than 97% specificity for the pre-departure testing regime, depending on the individual test product. The test must be provided by a testing provider which can meets these minimum standards, as well as the standards regarding the result notification requirements.
The Department is considering the recommendations made in the report and what actions can be taken to help avoid disagreements arising between the parents of critically ill children and clinicians treating them and, where this is not possible, resolve disagreements more quickly and compassionately.
The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening programme is currently offered to people between the ages of 60 years old and 74 years old. The programme is expanding to make it available to everyone aged 50 years old to 59 years old, this is happening gradually over four years and started in April 2021.
If people over the age of 74 years old have concerns about bowel cancer, they should speak to their general practitioner who will determine the best course of actions to take.
We expect the commissioning process to be completed in the coming weeks. While the review will not have a fixed membership, it will engage with a range of interested or affected people and organisations. This will include health professionals and the families of critically ill children, to ensure it develops a balanced evidence base for identifying solutions. The organisation undertaking the review will be asked to publish its terms of reference shortly after it has been commissioned.
The Department is currently examining the commissioning process for the review and further information will be available in due course.
When a Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decision is being made, the clinician should consider the patient’s wishes and every effort should be taken to reach an agreement with the patient or, if they lack capacity, their family or representative. If the patient or their family or representative do not agree with the decision, they should be given time to ask for a second opinion or review. This is in line with the National Health Service guidance for DNACPR decisions.
When a DNACPR decision is made the patient should also be told when it will be reviewed, and this is usually recorded on the DNACPR form. It is recommended that a DNACPR decision is reviewed each time a patient’s situation changes, for example when they leave hospital. If a patient is concerned about a DNACPR decision, they can contact their local Healthwatch to find out about how to get help making a complaint.
We have provided no such advice or direction as general practitioners are independent contractors with no mandatory working hours Therefore, no specific assessment has been made.
Failure to consult people and their families on decisions around CPR causes significant distress and we have taken decisive action to prevent this from happening. NHS England and NHS Improvement clinical leaders issued a number of letters to the health and social care system throughout April and May 2020, and in March 2021, to clarify best practice around do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions.
Joint guidance for clinicians from the British Medical Association, the Resuscitation Council UK and Royal College of Nursing reflects that agreement to a DNACPR is an individual decision and should involve the person concerned or, where the person lacks capacity, their families, carers, guardians or other legally recognised advocates. The Department reiterated this message in the Adult Social Care Winter Plan in 2020.
The DNACPR Ministerial Oversight Group continues to review the resources available to ensure adherence to DNACPR guidance across the system. Sensitive and well communicated DNACPRs can and should be an important part of patient care and end of life experience. We are committed to taking continued action to ensure those decisions are managed and communicated well in all settings.
The first meeting of the Ministerial Oversight Group has now taken place and the Group has set out their commitment to driving forward improvements. A summary of the meeting has been shared with interested stakeholders. The membership, workings and decisions of the Ministerial Oversight Group were published on 23 July.
The Ministerial Oversight Group was created in response to a key recommendation of the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) review of how Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions were made during the early phases of the pandemic. Further details of the Group’s membership, workings and key decisions will be published in due course.
The Department does not record or assess the circumstances of DNACPRs orders in place. However, the Ministerial Oversight Group will be responsible for the delivery and required changes of the CQC’s recommendations, to ensure adherence to guidance across the system about how DNACPRs are used.
The information requested is not held centrally.
Due to the concerns raised at the beginning of the COVID 19 pandemic around the application of Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions, the Department asked the Care Quality Commission to review how these decisions were made. Their report was published in March. The Department has established a Ministerial Oversight Group that will be responsible for the delivery and required changes of the recommendations of this report, to ensure adherence to guidance across the system on how DNACPRs are used.
The information requested is not held centrally.
Due to the concerns raised at the beginning of the COVID 19 pandemic around the application of Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions, the Department asked the Care Quality Commission to review how these decisions were made. Their report was published in March. The Department has established a Ministerial Oversight Group that will be responsible for the delivery and required changes of the recommendations of this report, to ensure adherence to guidance across the system on how DNACPRs are used.
The information requested is not held centrally.
Due to the concerns raised at the beginning of the COVID 19 pandemic around the application of Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions, the Department asked the Care Quality Commission to review how these decisions were made. Their report was published in March. The Department has established a Ministerial Oversight Group that will be responsible for the delivery and required changes of the recommendations of this report, to ensure adherence to guidance across the system on how DNACPRs are used.