Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to monitor the number of providers delivering publicly funded care services that have failed due to financial difficulties.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Care Quality Commission’s Market Oversight Scheme monitors the financial health of typically the largest and potentially most difficult-to-replace providers in the adult social care sector.

Adult social care services are provided through a largely outsourced market of commercial organisations and charities, commissioned by local authorities. Under the Care Act 2014, local authorities have a duty to promote the efficient and effective operation of their local market. Ensuring good management of the market and securing continuity of care in the event of market exit are fundamental elements of the system.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to manage the risks of care provider collapse, in particular to ensure that vulnerable individuals who rely on those services continue to receive care.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

Local authorities have a duty under the Care Act 2014 to ensure continuity of care if a provider exits the market as a result of business failure. This means that people should continue to receive the care and support they need if their adult social care provider is no longer able to carry on delivering services.

The Care Act 2014 also provides for the Care Quality Commission to monitor the financial health of the largest and potentially most difficult-to-replace adult social care providers in England. This allows them to warn local authorities if a provider is likely to fail for financial reasons and gives local authorities time to stand up their contingency plans.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the reasons why some local authorities have proposed (1) no increase, or (2) an increase below the rate of inflation, to fees for adult social care services.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

Local authorities negotiate fees individually with care providers to achieve a sustainable balance of quality, effectiveness, and value for money.

We recognise the importance of fee rates, which meet the costs of delivery of care, which is why the Market Sustainability and Improvement Fund has been provided to local authorities since 2023/24, which can be used based on their areas’ needs. Improving fee rates to providers is one of the three target areas local authorities can spend their allocation on.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government, in regard to the report Reasonable grounds decisions in the NRM – who has been impacted by the change to the decision-making threshold?, published by Justice and Care, what assessment they have made of the impact of the increased evidential requirements for positive reasonable grounds decisions on the ability of adult potential modern slavery victims to access specialist support.

Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)

All NRM decisions are made on an individual basis, carried out by trained specialist decision-makers in the Competent Authorities, in line with the Modern Slavery Statutory Guidance for England and Wales (under section 49 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015) and the non-statutory guidance for Scotland and Northern Ireland. The guidance is underpinned by The Slavery and Human Trafficking Definition of Victim Regulations 2022 and in accordance with the UK's international legal obligations.

We recognise the challenges associated with the National Referral Mechanism (NRM) and have made significant strides to implement changes. This Government recruited 200 new staff to clear the NRM decision backlog and as of March 2025, the backlog is now less than half the size it was at its worst in 2022.

On 30 April this year, we also published our improved and simplified NRM referral form following extensive feedback from over 450 stakeholders. The new referral form will improve the quality of referrals, better reflect victims’ experiences, and support more informed and consistent decision-making.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the report Reasonable grounds decisions in the NRM – who has been impacted by the change to the decision-making threshold?, published by Justice and Care, and what are the reasons why some groups of potential modern slavery victims receive disproportionate levels of negative reasonable grounds decisions.

Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)

All NRM decisions are made on an individual basis, carried out by trained specialist decision-makers in the Competent Authorities, in line with the Modern Slavery Statutory Guidance for England and Wales (under section 49 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015) and the non-statutory guidance for Scotland and Northern Ireland. The guidance is underpinned by The Slavery and Human Trafficking Definition of Victim Regulations 2022 and in accordance with the UK's international legal obligations.

We recognise the challenges associated with the National Referral Mechanism (NRM) and have made significant strides to implement changes. This Government recruited 200 new staff to clear the NRM decision backlog and as of March 2025, the backlog is now less than half the size it was at its worst in 2022.

On 30 April this year, we also published our improved and simplified NRM referral form following extensive feedback from over 450 stakeholders. The new referral form will improve the quality of referrals, better reflect victims’ experiences, and support more informed and consistent decision-making.

Healthcare Workers APPG
Tuesday 10th June 2025

Found: Name Party / Group Cat Eccles MP (Chair) Labour Dr Peter Prinsley MP (Officer) Labour Lord McColl of Dulwich

Obesity APPG
Wednesday 11th June 2025

Found: (Vice Chair) Members of the Group – • Martyn Day MP • Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe • Lord McColl of Dulwich

Obesity APPG
Wednesday 11th June 2025

Found: (Vice Chair) Members of the Group – • Martyn Day MP • Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe • Lord McColl of Dulwich

Scientific APPG
Wednesday 11th June 2025

Found: Lord Kakkar Lord Kirkhope of Harrogate Lord Krebs Lord Lucas Lord MacKenzie of Culkein Lord McColl of Dulwich

Scientific APPG
Wednesday 11th June 2025

Found: Whitchurch Lord Kakkar Lord Kirkhope of Harrogate Lord Krebs Lord MacKenzie of Culkein Lord McColl of Dulwich

Scientific APPG
Wednesday 11th June 2025

Found: Whitchurch Lord Kakkar Lord Kirkhope of Harrogate Lord Krebs Lord MacKenzie of Culkein Lord McColl of Dulwich

Scientific APPG
Wednesday 11th June 2025

Found: Lord Judd Lord Kakkar Lord Kirkhope of Harrogate Lord Krebs Lord MacKenzie of Culkein Lord McColl of Dulwich

Scientific APPG
Wednesday 11th June 2025

Found: Whitchurch Lord Kakkar Lord Kirkhope of Harrogate Lord Krebs Lord MacKenzie of Culkein Lord McColl of Dulwich

Global Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights APPG
Wednesday 11th June 2025

Found: International Development (Gender Equality) Bill – second reading, 7th February 2014 Lord McColl of Dulwich