Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the number of preventable deaths in the UK due to respiratory diseases; and what steps they are taking to address this.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government recognises that many respiratory diseases are associated with preventable risk factors, including smoking, air pollution, occupational exposures, poor housing conditions, and delayed diagnosis.
Data published by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that the under 75 year old mortality rate from respiratory disease considered preventable in England was 19.6 deaths per 100,000 population in 2024.
The Government is taking action to reduce respiratory disease morbidity and mortality through measures that prevent disease, improve early diagnosis, and support effective treatment, including implementation of the Tobacco and Vapes Act, support for local smoking cessation services, improvements in air quality, vaccination programmes against respiratory infections, and delivery of NHS Long Term Plan commitments on respiratory disease.
NHS England's National Respiratory Programme is focused on improving outcomes for people with respiratory disease through earlier diagnosis, better disease management, and access to effective and innovative treatments. This includes improving access to quality-assured spirometry, pulmonary rehabilitation, and earlier diagnosis of conditions such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), supported by commissioning standards and guidance for commissioners.
NHS England, working with Health Innovation Networks, has also established a multi-year Respiratory Transformation Partnership to identify scalable approaches to reducing premature mortality, improving disease recognition, supporting the consistent delivery of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommended care, and increasing access to existing and emerging biologic therapies for people living with asthma and COPD. A nationally coordinated evaluation will support evidence generation, shared learning, and future investment decisions.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Merron on 6 July (HL1488), when they expect the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency to complete its review of evidence on mental health and related risks for licensed migraine prophylaxis medications.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is an executive agency of the Department with responsibility for ensuring medicines meet appropriate standards of quality, efficacy, and safety.
The MHRA has plans to gather the currently available evidence on mental health and other related risks for licensed migraine prophylaxis medications, as referenced in the separate responses to questions HL1488 and HL1543. A formal timeline for this review has not yet been agreed, and consequently we are unable to provide an expected completion date at this stage.
The MHRA is committed to communicating any findings that may have implications for patient safety or the safe use of medicines. The MHRA will sometimes issue communications, such as drug safety updates, after the conclusion of a review. However, the review is at an early stage, and it would be premature to comment on any potential communication plans. In addition, any product information changes that may arise as a result of this review would be reflected in the published product information available at locations such as the MHRA website or the Electronic Medicines Compendium website.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what indicator outcomes have been agreed for improving brain cancer outcomes across the Department of Health and Social Care, NHS England, the National Institute for Health and Care Research, regulators, and delivery bodies.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The National Cancer Plan sets out a whole-system approach to improving outcomes for all cancers, including brain tumours, with a focus on earlier diagnosis, faster access to treatment, research and innovation, patient experience, and survival. The plan's overarching ambition is that three in four people diagnosed with cancer will survive for five years or more by 2035.
The Government is also strengthening support for brain tumour research. In January 2026, the NIHR announced increased investment of more than £25 million in the NIHR Brain Tumour Research Consortium, which aims to accelerate the development of new treatments and improve outcomes for adults and children with brain tumours.
The Department continues to work closely with NHS England, the NIHR, and other partners to deliver the commitments set out in the National Cancer Plan and to support improvements in outcomes for people affected by brain tumours.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the equality impact assessment Health Bill: ICBs as strategic commissioners, published on 14 May, what mechanisms they intend to use to ensure enhanced oversight of Integrated Care Board specialised commissioning.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Subject to the passage of the Health Bill, specialised services commissioned by integrated care boards (ICBs) will continue to operate within a framework of nationally-set standards, service specifications, and clinical commissioning policies to ensure consistent and equitable access to care across England.
Alongside ICB accountability for commissioning these services, the Department, through its new regional offices, will be responsible for providing oversight and assurance of both the commissioning system and the quality and performance of providers. This will include monitoring against national standards and quality and outcome metrics for different services.
In addition, ICBs will be supported in discharging their new commissioning responsibilities through seven Offices for Pan-ICB Commissioning, which aim to ensure that we maintain a critical mass of expert commissioning knowledge and the capability necessary for the effective and efficient commissioning of these important and complex areas of service provision.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Merron on 6 July (HL1488), how the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency will communicate the conclusions of its review of mental health risks for migraine prophylaxis medications; whether that Agency will consider a drug safety update or other national safety communication; and whether any resulting changes to product information would be reflected in national electronic prescribing and medicines decision-support systems.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is an executive agency of the Department with responsibility for ensuring medicines meet appropriate standards of quality, efficacy, and safety.
The MHRA has plans to gather the currently available evidence on mental health and other related risks for licensed migraine prophylaxis medications, as referenced in the separate responses to questions HL1488 and HL1543. A formal timeline for this review has not yet been agreed, and consequently we are unable to provide an expected completion date at this stage.
The MHRA is committed to communicating any findings that may have implications for patient safety or the safe use of medicines. The MHRA will sometimes issue communications, such as drug safety updates, after the conclusion of a review. However, the review is at an early stage, and it would be premature to comment on any potential communication plans. In addition, any product information changes that may arise as a result of this review would be reflected in the published product information available at locations such as the MHRA website or the Electronic Medicines Compendium website.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the public protection implications of psychotherapists and counsellors continuing to advertise and practise despite having been removed from Professional Standards Authority accredited voluntary registers because of misconduct; and what consideration they have given to strengthening safeguards in that area.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
There is no statutory requirement for psychotherapists and counsellors to be registered with an organisation that holds a voluntary accredited register with the Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care (PSA). Organisations that hold registers that are accredited by the PSA are independent, representative bodies and as such, they do not fall under Government oversight. Any decisions about the practise requirements for the professions they represent are a matter for those organisations and their members.
The Government would encourage anyone accessing psychotherapy and counselling services to choose a professional that is a member of a statutorily regulated profession or registered with a voluntary accredited register listed on the PSA website.
The Department has no current plans to extend statutory regulation to the counselling and psychotherapy professions.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government how much, and what percentage of total research expenditure, has been spent on research into (1) Oligodendroglioma, (2) Glioblastoma, (3) Astrocytoma, and (4) Diffuse Intrinsic Pontine Glioma, brain tumour types in the last decade.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Government responsibility for delivering cancer research is shared between the Department of Health and Social Care, with research delivered by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, with research delivered via UK Research and Innovation.
The Department of Health and Social Care’s investment in the NIHR facilitates the direct funding of research projects through NIHR programmes, support for researchers to develop and conduct research through NIHR translational infrastructure, and a workforce to deliver research on behalf of other funders through NIHR research delivery infrastructure.
The following table shows the amount the Department, through the NIHR, committed to research for oligodendroglioma, glioblastoma, astrocytoma, and diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma between the financial years 2015/16 to 2024/25:
Cancer type | Amount |
Oligodendroglioma | £2,600,000 |
Glioblastoma | £21,100,000 |
Astrocytoma | £1,100,000 |
Diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma | £772,100 |
As NIHR infrastructure primarily funds staff and National Health Service support costs for research delivery, the spend is not directly attributable to specific research studies for the most part, but an estimate is derived based on the number of studies in brain tumour research against the annual infrastructure spend, and is included in the above figures.
The data does fluctuate due to changes such as contract variations and updated information regarding financial reconciliations and support activity.
A breakdown of the percentage of the total research expenditure is not available. This is because much of the NIHR’s investments are for cross-cutting cancer research activities within the NHS and wider health and care system, including research facilities and workforce, known as NIHR infrastructure. In addition, the NIHR cancer research portfolio contains non-specific brain cancer research projects, which will add to the evidence base for the different types of tumours.
The NIHR continues to welcome high-quality applications for research into any aspect of human health and care, including brain cancer. These applications are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to the public and health and care services, value for money, and scientific quality.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether the data described in the UK Biobank Data Statement on 28 April (HL Deb cols 1117–18) would be considered identifiable human genomic data under the Safeguarding UK human genomic data guidance, published on 2 July.
Answered by Lord Vallance of Balham
The Government understands that some of the data described in UK Biobank's statement from 28th April would be in scope of the Government's recent guidance on safeguarding UK human genomic data, however it is for the Information Commissioner's Office to determine if this may be potentially identifiable data. UK Biobank’s dataset is critical in supporting scientific discoveries that improve patient health, and we expect UK Biobank to remain one of the leading health research resources. Government continues to engage with Biobank to ensure that they are working to both protect the data of participants while ensuring that researchers who have a legitimate need to use the datasets can once again resume their research as soon as possible.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government how much funding they have provided for brain tumour research since 2018; and how that funding was broken down by category, including (1) direct research funding awarded to projects, (2) funding allocated to the National Institute for Health and Care Research Brain Tumour Research Consortium, (3) funding that remains conditional on approvals, milestones or reporting, (4) research infrastructure funding, and (5) funding delivered through UK Research and Innovation, including the Medical Research Council.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Government responsibility for delivering brain cancer research is shared between the Department of Health and Social Care, with research delivered by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, with research delivered via UK Research and Innovation (UKRI).
We are committed to furthering our investment in brain cancer research and have already taken steps to stimulate scientific progress and build scientific capacity to do research on brain cancer.
As announced in the National Cancer Plan, investment in the NIHR Brain Tumour Research Consortium, co-funding of the Cancer Research UK Brain Tumour Centres of Excellence, and other direct programmatic spend through NIHR funding streams totals a combined investment of £32.3 million since July 2024, and a total of £45.2 million since 2018, all of which is designed to accelerate brain cancer research.
The total investment in the NIHR Brain Tumour Research Consortium is over £25 million over the course of the awards. This includes an initial £13.7 million investment announced in December 2025, which has been fully contracted. In January 2026, the NIHR announced further investment of a minimum of £11.7 million in the Consortium through funding of work packages. For all work packages, contracting and further payments are contingent upon teams submitting and reviewing detailed costs and, if applicable, agreeing to the suggested amendments and requests for clarification which are currently in progress.
The NIHR’s wider investments in research infrastructure, such as research centres, which run studies, facilities, and services, and the research workforce, leverages research funding from other donors and organisations. These NIHR investments in infrastructure are estimated to be £44.5 million over the period 2018/19 to 2024/25, enabling 298 brain tumour research studies to take place.
Research delivered through UKRI, which includes the Medical Research Council, is the responsibility of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. Over six years, from the financial year 2018/19 to 2023/24, UKRI committed £46.8 million to brain tumour research. This is the most recent data we hold.
The NIHR continues to welcome high-quality applications for research into any aspect of human health and care, including brain cancer. These applications are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to the public and health and care services, value for money, and scientific quality.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to accelerate access to modern, biology-driven treatments for brain cancer, including Astrocytoma across all grades, and to reduce reliance on outdated therapies; what national pathway exists to enable access to targeted or repurposed treatments where the same mutation is already treated in another cancer; and what barriers prevent access to those treatments.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government recognises the significant impact cancerous brain tumours can have on patients, carers, and families, and that treatment options remain limited. All new licensed medicines, including for brain cancer, are evaluated by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), which assesses whether they are a clinically and cost-effective use of National Health Service resources.
NICE has recommended vorasidenib for eligible patients aged 12 years old and over with IDH mutant low-grade glioma, as an option for treating grade 2 astrocytoma or oligodendroglioma where it is considered the most suitable treatment. NICE is also actively evaluating further medicines for potential use in brain tumours.
NICE works with companies and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to issue guidance as close as possible to licensing. The NHS in England must fund medicines recommended by NICE, and the Cancer Drugs Fund can provide access from the point of a draft positive NICE recommendation.
The MHRA recognises the challenges of developing treatments for rare cancers, where large-scale clinical evidence can be difficult to generate, and supports timely access to safe, effective, and high-quality treatments for patients with high unmet need.
The MHRA supports innovative approaches such as precision medicine, real-world evidence, and international collaboration. Relevant routes include Project Orbis, the Access Consortium, the International Recognition Pathway, and the Innovative Licensing and Access Pathway, alongside the Rare Diseases Framework and recent regulations to support faster development of personalised cancer treatments.