Asked by: Lord McColl of Dulwich (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many legal cases have been filed against the Department of Health about public health matters in each of the last five years; and how many are currently in progress.
Answered by Lord O'Shaughnessy
The Department and the Government Legal Department do not categorise cases as specifically relating to ‘public health’. According to Government Legal Department records, the approximate total number of judicial review cases brought against the Department in each of the last five years is shown in the following table. 42 cases are recorded as active as of 15 September 2017.
Year | Number of cases brought |
2012/13 | 26 |
2013/14 | 16 |
2014/15 | 22 |
2015/16 | 25 |
2016/17 | 28 |
Total | 117 |
Source: Data from the Government Legal Department.
Asked by: Lord McColl of Dulwich (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, in the light of the guidance issued by NHS England to clinical commissioning groups in May stating that all areas of the country should have a system in place from September to ensure that all new GP referrals are subject to clinical peer review, how they define such reviews.
Answered by Lord O'Shaughnessy
Clinical peer reviews are a simple way for general practitioners (GPs) to support each other and help patients get the best care, from the right person at the right time, without having to make unnecessary trips to hospital. More than half of clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) have already implemented some form of clinical peer review system and the NHS England guidance will help ensure best practice is shared to the remaining local commissioners.
There is flexibility in how local CCGs and their GPs implement prospective internal clinical peer review, but it should see GPs reviewing each other’s new referrals to provide constructive feedback in a safe learning environment. Delivering prospective internal peer review will help ensure that all patients get access to the optimum care pathway. It should not be established as an approval process and the referring GP retains responsibility for the patient and makes the final decision.
Asked by: Lord McColl of Dulwich (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the fact that the percentage of fat in cow's milk and human milk is the same at 3.5 per cent, what advice they have given to the public on whether they should consume whole milk, skimmed milk or semi-skimmed milk.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
Milk is a valuable source of a range of nutrients, including calcium and protein. The Government recommends the consumption of lower fat milks for the general population aged over five years. This is because dairy products are a source of saturated fat which raises blood cholesterol and increases the risk of cardiovascular disease.
Asked by: Lord McColl of Dulwich (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of recently published research stating that the consumption of one egg per day may lower the risk of stroke, whether they intend to review their advice that people should have no more than two eggs per week.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
Eggs are included in the national food model, the Eatwell Guide. As part of this, the government recommends people eat some meat, fish, eggs, beans and other non-dairy sources of protein. Eggs are considered to make a valuable contribution to a healthy, balanced diet. A copy of the Eatwell Guide is attached.
There are no Government recommendations on a maximum intake of eggs. There are no plans to review current advice.
Asked by: Lord McColl of Dulwich (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Earl Howe on 18 November 2014 (HL2644) and on 26 January 2015 (HL4063 and HL4228), whether they will place in the Library of the House a full copy of the correspondence between either the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) or members of the HFEA's Expert Panel and the Chinese authorities, in which the reasons for banning pronuclear transfer in China following publication of the abstract in <i>Fertility and Sterility</i> in 2003 (Volume 30, supplement 3, p56) were explained in detail.
Answered by Earl Howe - Deputy Leader of the House of Lords
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that neither the Authority nor the members of Expert Panel it convened have had any correspondence with the “Chinese authorities” on this matter.
With regard to correspondence between the expert panel, the HFEA and the authors of the Zhang researchers, I refer my noble friend to my previous Written Answer of 26 January on the matter highlighting that the Expert Panel is independent of the HFEA and does not act on its behalf.
Asked by: Lord McColl of Dulwich (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the latest research shared on a confidential basis with the Expert Panel convened by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) indicates that the first embryo generated following either spindle-chromosomal complex transfer or pronuclear transfer could be implanted into a woman later this year with the first baby born in 2016, as reported in <i>The Independent </i>on 30 January and by BBC News online on 1 February.
Answered by Earl Howe - Deputy Leader of the House of Lords
At this time, any suggestion of a date when the first mitochondrial donation treatment cycle might take place or when the first child resulting from the use of the donation techniques might be born is speculation.
The Draft Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Mitochondrial Donation) Regulations 2015, if approved by Parliament, will come into force on 29 October 2015. Clinics wishing to offer mitochondrial donation in treatment after that date, will first need to apply to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority for authorisation to do so; this would need to be granted before such treatment could take place.
Asked by: Lord McColl of Dulwich (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Earl Howe on 26 January (HL4063 and HL4228) and by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Public Health, Jane Ellison, on 2 February (HC222039), whether the dates on which the members of the Expert Panel convened by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) held its meetings were recorded or otherwise indicated by minutes of their discussion meetings published on the HFEA website; how it was confirmed that correspondence regarding the abstract in <i>Fertility and Sterility</i> in 2003 (Volume 30, supplement 3, p56) was shared with other panel members by forwarding of emails or by distributing printed copies in person at discussion meetings; why the HFEA has been unable to determine the exact date on which the Expert Panel first became aware of this abstract; and whether they can indicate the first month and year for which records are available when the Expert Panel discussed correspondence regarding this abstract.
Answered by Earl Howe - Deputy Leader of the House of Lords
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that it has convened an Expert Panel to review the safety and efficacy of methods to avoid mitochondrial disease through assisted conception on three occasions - in 2011, 2013 and 2014 (plus an addendum to the third review in 2014). The minutes of the Panel’s meetings for the 2011 and 2013 reviews are available on the HFEA website at:
http://www.hfea.gov.uk/6372.html
The minutes of the 2014 review will be on the website shortly. All of the minutes record the dates the Panel’s meetings took place. As outlined in the report of its third review, carried out in 2014, the Panel met three times for this review between February and June 2014, their main meeting being on 4 April 2014.
As outlined in the Panel’s addendum to the third review (a review of the safety and efficacy of polar body transfer to avoid mitochondrial disease) members met twice, on 26 August and 16 September 2014, to discuss this addendum.
As explained in my answer to the noble Lord, Lord Alton of Liverpool on 26 January 2015 (HL4063 and HL4228), a member of the Expert Panel corresponded with one of the authors of the abstract referred to in the noble Lord’s question, and the HFEA has advised that this correspondence was shared with the other Panel members. The correspondence was by email. The Expert Panel corresponded about this abstract in September 2014.
Asked by: Lord McColl of Dulwich (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 9 February (HL4411), how the draft Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Mitochondrial Donation) Regulations 2015 make provision for the follow-up studies to investigate how mutations vary in each of the different cells of the resulting children; at what age or ages the children would be when their cells would be examined in that way; how many different tissues and of which type would have to be biopsied to obtain the cells of interest; how informed consent would be obtained from the children for that purpose; and at what point such children would be informed of the techniques used in their conception.
Answered by Earl Howe - Deputy Leader of the House of Lords
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Mitochondrial Donation) Regulations 2015, if approved by Parliament, will not come into force until 29 October 2015. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) will consider how best to apply a monitoring framework to clinics awarded a licence to carry out mitochondrial donation treatment, against which it would inspect.
The HFEA will announce its proposals for the regulation and monitoring of mitochondrial donation treatment cycles following the approval of regulations by Parliament.
Asked by: Lord McColl of Dulwich (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government when the HVJ-E protein from the envelope of inactivated Sendai virus was licensed by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency for clinical use; what were the conditions treated by therapeutic use of that protein; and how the optimal dose was determined.
Answered by Earl Howe - Deputy Leader of the House of Lords
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is aware of the potential medical use of the HVJ-E (hemagglutinating virus of Japan - envelope) protein from the envelope of the Sendai virus, both for drug and gene delivery. However the HVJ-E protein from the envelope of the inactivated Sendai virus is not currently included in a marketing authorisation approved by MHRA.
Asked by: Lord McColl of Dulwich (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the cost in 2012–13 and 2013–14 of running the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; and how many people are currently employed by that organisation.
Answered by Earl Howe - Deputy Leader of the House of Lords
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s (NICE) comprehensive expenditure in 2012-13 and 2013-14, taken from its published annual report and accounts1, was:
2012-132 - £64,955,000
2013-143 - £60,754,000
We understand that 588 staff were employed by NICE in June 2014.
Notes:
1www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/330381/NICE_annual_report_2013-2014_PRINT.pdf
2The 2012-13 figure includes £6,628,000 attributable to the National Clinical Assessment Service, which NICE hosted for one year before its transfer on 1 April 2013 to the NHS Litigation Authority.
3On 1 May 2013 the National Technology Adoption Centre transferred to NICE from the Central Manchester University Hospitals Foundation Trust.