Asked by: Lord Stone of Blackheath (Non-affiliated - 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 21 November (HL11829), whether they plan to ask (1) the Medical Cannabis Clinicians Society, and (2) patient bodies such as the Medcan Family Foundation, to contribute to the review of the effect of the 2018 law change to allow access to unlicensed cannabis-based products for medicinal use; and what steps they are taking to ensure that that review includes consultation with scientists and patients.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
On 1 November 2018, cannabis-based products for medicinal use were placed in Schedule 2 to the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001. The regulations permit the prescribing of these products by, or under the direction of, specialist clinicians on the General Medical Council Specialist Register, and for use in clinical trials.
On 2 June, the Government asked the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), a statutory independent scientific advisory body that advises the Government on drug-related issues, to review the effects of the 2018 law change. This will look at whether the changes have had the desired impact, and whether there are any unintended consequences. The ACMD is an independent scientific advisory body and determines its own procedures.
The ACMD published a public call for evidence running from 17 September 2025 to 17 October 2025, inviting submissions of evidence from all stakeholders, including, but not exclusive to, clinicians, patient bodies, scientists, and researchers. The Department alerted interested parties to the ACMD call for evidence, including the Medical Cannabis Clinicians Society, as secretariat to the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Medical Cannabis under Prescription, and patient bodies, including the Medcan Family Foundation.
Asked by: Lord Stone of Blackheath (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to transfer responsibility for policy and governance relating to cannabis-based medicinal products to the Department for Health and Social Care; and what assessment they have made of the impact of that transfer on regulatory barriers, clinical research and patient access through the NHS.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Home Office is the lead department for controlled drug legislation, whilst the Department of Health and Social Care and its Arm's Length Bodies lead on healthcare and the regulation of medicines. The Government has no plans to change this.
The Department of Health and Social Care and the Home Office work closely with other system partners in developing and reviewing policy on controlled drugs in healthcare, including cannabis-based products for medicinal use (CBPMs).
The Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England are taking an evidenced-based approach to the access of CBPMs. Since the law changed in 2018 to allow the lawful access to unlicensed CBPMs, two licensed cannabis-based medicines have been made available for prescribing on the National Health Service for patients with multiple sclerosis or hard to treat epilepsies and tuberous sclerosis, where clinically appropriate. This follows approval from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).
NICE has assessed the available evidence, concluding that there is a clear need for more evidence to support routine prescribing and funding decisions of unlicensed CBPMs. NHS funding decisions follow established procedures that ensure equitable distribution of funding, prioritising those medicines that have proved their safety, quality, and clinical and cost effectiveness.
On the 2 June, the Government asked the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), a statutory independent scientific advisory body that advises the Government on drug-related issues, to review the effect of the 2018 law change, and to look at whether it has had the desired impact, and whether there are any unintended consequences. The Government will carefully consider the ACMD’s advice prior to making any decisions.
Asked by: Lord Stone of Blackheath (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that the cost of prescribed cannabis for medical purposes does not constitute a barrier to access for disabled people.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
There are extensive arrangements in place in England to ensure that prescriptions are affordable for everyone. Approximately 89% of prescription items are dispensed free of charge in the community in England, and there are wide range of exemptions from prescription charges already in place for which those with medical conditions may be eligible.
The Department does not make provision for the funding of medicines outside of the National Health Service’s commissioning systems and it remains that the cost of treatments sought privately are the responsibility of patients.
Pricing in the private market is a matter for individual companies and for private providers.
Asked by: Lord Stone of Blackheath (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of mortgage size and availability upon (1) house prices, (2) rent levels, (3) economic growth, and (4) social housing costs; and what plans, if any, they have to mitigate these impacts.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
While Treasury Ministers and officials are regularly in contact with lenders on all aspects of their mortgage business to understand their position and current lending conditions, it is important to note that the pricing and availability of mortgages is a commercial decision for lenders in which the Government does not intervene. The rules and regulations that govern mortgage lending are set by regulators that are independent of the Government.
However, the Government recognises the importance of affordability and is committed to building 1.5 million more homes over this Parliament. In the 2025 Spending Review, the Government committed an additional £39 billion to a successor for the Affordable Homes Programme, to be delivered over 10 years starting from 2026-2027. This spending, alongside efforts to reform financial regulation, represent a key part of the Government’s mission to kick start economic growth and support more first-time buyers.
Asked by: Lord Stone of Blackheath (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what consideration they have given to eliminating National Insurance contributions for employers for each disabled employee who is hired; and what assessment have they made of the effect of this on the level of employment among the working-age disabled population.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
In order to repair the public finances and help raise the revenue required to increase funding for public services, the Government has taken the very difficult decision to increase employer National Insurance.
There are a wide range of factors that the Government needs to consider when introducing new tax reliefs, for example whether these support wider Government objectives, or add disproportionate complexity into the tax system. It is likely that a new relief would have to be paid for, at least in part, by increased taxes for other taxpayers or reducing expenditure on public services.
Asked by: Lord Stone of Blackheath (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they intend to support the plant-based by default approach to hospital menus proposed in the letter sent by the Plants First Healthcare Campaign to NHS Trusts and integrated care boards on 16 October, and if so, how.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The National Health Service does not intend to support a default plant-based approach to hospital food. The Government and the NHS understand the importance of patients receiving healthy, nutritious, and balanced food, including fruit, vegetables, and proteins. The NHS’ National Standards for Food and Drink encourage the use of healthier, more sustainable menus that include an increased consumption of fruit, vegetables, and fibre.
Asked by: Lord Stone of Blackheath (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have considered to use trained and non-active military personnel in NHS accident and emergency departments to utilise their skills to provide rapid triage of patient’s needs.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
In April 2024, NHS England launched a drive to recruit armed forces veterans into a range of National Health Service roles. The Step into Health pathway supports members of the armed forces community in connecting to NHS organisations to set up training opportunities, clinical and general work placements, insight days, and application support. More information about the programme is available on the NHS website, in an online only format.
Asked by: Lord Stone of Blackheath (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Douglas-Miller on 14 February (HL1609), what assessment they have made of the adequacy of planned flood protection for Shepperton, Sunbury and Walton-on-Thames under the River Thames Scheme currently going through consultation, given the flooding in 2014 and 2024.
Answered by Lord Douglas-Miller
The River Thames Scheme is currently carrying out Statutory consultation on its proposals. The consultation has included public events in Shepperton, Walton and Sunbury where over 1,000 people attended and spoke with members of the project team.
The proposals include building a new channel that will significantly reduce the risk of flooding between Staines and Shepperton. The scheme also includes proposals to increase the capacity of the weirs on the Thames at Teddington, Molesey and Sunbury along with lowering the bed of the Thames near Walton. The weir capacity is being increased as much as possible and this will achieve some reduction in risk downstream of Shepperton along the Thames. The level of risk reduction is different in each location.
The level of flood risk reduction that will be achieved is available for everyone to see as part of the consultation. The results are set out in detail in the Modelling report for the scheme which can be found at: RTS Modelling non-technical summary (see attached).
Asked by: Lord Stone of Blackheath (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the correlation between (1) the release of floodwater from the Jubilee River channel as occurred in 2014 and 2024, and (2) subsequent levels of floodwater and property damage, and the extent to which vulnerable local people were unable to receive social services.
Answered by Lord Douglas-Miller
The Jubilee Flood Relief Channel is part of the Maidenhead Windsor and Eton Flood Alleviation Scheme (MWEFAS) that reduces the risk of flooding to approximately 3,000 properties in Maidenhead, Windsor and Eton. The Jubilee Flood Relief Channel always has some water flowing through it. In flood conditions, we split some of the water away from the River Thames through the Jubilee. The Jubilee provides extra space for this water before it rejoins the River Thames at Datchet. It is not designed to reduce flood risk to communities upstream or downstream of the scheme. It does not adversely impact communities downstream. We operate weir gates at Taplow to control the amount of water being split into the Jubilee Flood Relief Channel. As the flow in the River Thames increases, we open the gates gradually in small increments to allow water to flow through the channel.
The Environment Agency reviews the performance of their Flood and Coastal Risk Management assets to ensure they continue to perform as designed to protect homes and communities. Following flooding in 2003, river modelling was completed to re-examine any impacts from the Jubilee Flood Relief Channel on downstream communities. The results showed that there would be very little difference in the flows at Windsor, and the downstream water levels, with and without the Jubilee Flood Relief Channel being operated.
In February 2014 over 1000+ properties flooded internally across the Thames area, with the greatest numbers of these of these in the Lower Thames in Berkshire and Surrey. The flooding was very prolonged and lasted from February 2014 through to March, with many communities impacted along the Thames, such as at Datchet, Wraysbury, Egham, Chertsey, Staines and communities further downstream through Surrey. There were no reported properties flooded internally in Windsor in 2014.
In January 2024, Storm Henk resulted in heavy and widespread rainfall falling on saturated ground in a short space of time. There had been flooding in some local areas in December 2023 primarily affecting tributaries of the River Thames. The total volume of flow which passed down the Jubilee flood relief channel appears similar to 2014. The Environment Agency is currently receiving and collating reports on the number of properties that may have been impacted. Current information indicates around 300 properties may have flooded internally across the Thames Area.
Following a significant flood incident, the Environment Agency reviews all areas of incident response including partnership working to understand impacts and actions to better prepare for future events. We are currently undertaking this following the January 2024 flooding.
Our Environment Agency online portal Citizen Space holds a suite of useful information relating to the Jubilee River including videos and fact sheets and can be located under Maidenhead Windsor and Eton Flood Alleviation Scheme.
Asked by: Lord Stone of Blackheath (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the practice of holding flood water in the Jubilee River channel to prevent flooding of properties in Maidenhead, Windsor and Eton; and of its impacts on downstream communities.
Answered by Lord Douglas-Miller
The Jubilee flood relief channel, forms part of the ‘Maidenhead, Windsor and Eton Flood Alleviation Scheme’ that reduces the risk of flooding to 3,200 properties in Maidenhead, Windsor, Eton and Cookham. Published details on the Jubilee River flood alleviation scheme are available on - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).
The flood relief channel is not designed to store or hold flood water. It provides additional capacity for water that would have flowed through and flooded communities in Maidenhead, Windsor and Eton, taking it a different route via the Jubilee flood relief channel, before returning it back into the Thames upstream of Datchet.
Flood modelling for the Maidenhead, Windsor and Eton Flood Alleviation Scheme prior to its construction showed that the scheme would not increase flood risk for others.
After flooding in 2003, independent river modelling was completed to re-examine any impacts from the Jubilee flood relief channel on downstream communities. The results showed that there is very little difference made to water flows at Windsor compared to levels downstream when the channel is operated. The executive summary of the independent modelling was carried out and described in ‘Mechanisms of Flooding’ [attached].