Asked by: Paul Beresford (Conservative - Mole Valley)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant of the Answer of 3 September 2020 to Question 81490 on Hygiene: Products, whether the National Fire Chiefs Council’s press statement setting out the low risk of alcohol-based hand sanitisers takes into consideration the Health and Safety Executive’s guidance on storing alcohol in workplaces across the UK.
Answered by James Brokenshire
The consideration of guidance that informs National Fire Chiefs Council’s (NFCC’s) press statements is a matter for the NFCC.
Under the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations (DSEAR) 2002, employers must assess and eliminate or reduce risks from dangerous substances so far as is reasonably practicable in order to keep people safe.
As outlined in my answer to Question 81490, those responsible for premises are also required by the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 to consider the fire risks on that premises and ensure that these are mitigated to as low a level as reasonably practicable.
Asked by: Paul Beresford (Conservative - Mole Valley)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will undertake a review of whether alcohol-free hand sanitisers which are independently lab-certified to be effective can be included in public guidance alongside alcohol-based products.
Answered by Jo Churchill - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Providers of National Health Service care in England use the evidence cited and ensure that appropriate training is provided to health care workers in hand hygiene, providers also ensure that products are purchased that are consistent with the best available evidence. All healthcare workers have access to occupational health assessment and are referred for assessment and treatment in the event of developing skin complications. Using the guidelines, recommendations made by occupational health are followed by NHS providers as part of risk assessment and mitigation for the individual and the patient.
As Health and Safety Executive guidance for the general public states, and in line with WHO guidance, alcohol does not have to be “active ingredients” to be effective in hand sanitizer. The World Health Organization recommend that hand sanitiser should contain a minimum of 60% alcohol, but non-alcohol based sanitisers can also be effective when combined with other social distancing measures.
Asked by: Paul Beresford (Conservative - Mole Valley)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of guidance on hand sanitisers for people who cannot use alcohol-based hand rubs as a result of (a) eczema, (b) dermatitis, (c) other skin conditions and (d) allergy reactions.
Answered by Jo Churchill - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Providers of National Health Service care in England use the evidence cited and ensure that appropriate training is provided to health care workers in hand hygiene, providers also ensure that products are purchased that are consistent with the best available evidence. All healthcare workers have access to occupational health assessment and are referred for assessment and treatment in the event of developing skin complications. Using the guidelines, recommendations made by occupational health are followed by NHS providers as part of risk assessment and mitigation for the individual and the patient.
As Health and Safety Executive guidance for the general public states, and in line with WHO guidance, alcohol does not have to be “active ingredients” to be effective in hand sanitizer. The World Health Organization recommend that hand sanitiser should contain a minimum of 60% alcohol, but non-alcohol based sanitisers can also be effective when combined with other social distancing measures.
Asked by: Paul Beresford (Conservative - Mole Valley)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment the Government has made of the (a) effect of alcohol-based hand sanitisers on people with skin conditions and (b) effectiveness of alternatives available to people who cannot use alcohol-based hand sanitisers due to skin conditions or allergies.
Answered by Jo Churchill - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Providers of National Health Service care in England use the evidence cited and ensure that appropriate training is provided to health care workers in hand hygiene, providers also ensure that products are purchased that are consistent with the best available evidence. All healthcare workers have access to occupational health assessment and are referred for assessment and treatment in the event of developing skin complications. Using the guidelines, recommendations made by occupational health are followed by NHS providers as part of risk assessment and mitigation for the individual and the patient.
As Health and Safety Executive guidance for the general public states, and in line with WHO guidance, alcohol does not have to be “active ingredients” to be effective in hand sanitizer. The World Health Organization recommend that hand sanitiser should contain a minimum of 60% alcohol, but non-alcohol based sanitisers can also be effective when combined with other social distancing measures.
Asked by: Paul Beresford (Conservative - Mole Valley)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment the Government has made, ahead of schools returning in September 2020, of the (a) effectiveness and (b) safety of the use of alcohol-based hand sanitisers in schools.
Answered by Nick Gibb
The Government has been clear that all pupils, in all year groups, should return to school full-time from the beginning of the autumn term and on 2 July we published guidance to help schools prepare for this. The guidance can be viewed here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/actions-for-schools-during-the-coronavirus-outbreak/guidance-for-full-opening-schools.
The guidance sets out a system of controls which provide a framework for school leaders to put in place proportionate protective measures to minimise the risks of COVID-19 transmission, including cleaning hands thoroughly more often than usual.
COVID-19 is an easy virus to kill when it is on skin. This can be done with soap and running water or hand sanitiser. Schools must ensure that pupils clean their hands regularly, including when they arrive at school, when they return from breaks, when they change rooms and before and after eating.
Schools have been advised to consider whether they have enough hand washing or hand sanitiser ‘stations’ available so that all pupils and staff can clean their hands regularly. Schools have also been asked to supervise hand sanitiser use given risks around ingestion. Small children and pupils with complex needs should be helped to clean their hands properly. Skin friendly cleaning wipes can also be used as an alternative where required.
Asked by: Paul Beresford (Conservative - Mole Valley)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what plans the Government has to review the regulatory regime for hand sanitiser products to ensure those on sale are both safe and effective.
Answered by Mims Davies - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The EU Biocidal Products Regulation 528/2012 (BPR) has applied since 2013. In line with the EU Exit Withdrawal Agreement, the BPR is being retained with changes to reflect the position at the end of the Transition Period. This process does not allow the UK to make policy changes. Thus, there are no current plans to review the procedures within the UK biocides legislation. HSE has no evidence that the current regulatory approach is ineffective.
BPR requires that all the active substances used in hand sanitiser products are reviewed for their safety, both to people and the wider environment. Only products containing active substances that are undergoing that review process are allowed to be marketed.
Once the review of an active substance has been completed and the active is approved as being suitable to continue being used, each product containing that substance is then assessed, both for safety and for efficacy. While the review of an active substance is ongoing, products containing that substance can continue to be marketed subject to the requirements of general legislation relating to product safety and the supply of chemicals.
The BPR does not regulate the price of hand sanitiser products.
There are no current plans to review the regulation of sales of hand sanitiser products.
Asked by: Paul Beresford (Conservative - Mole Valley)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the fire risk of alcohol-based hand sanitisers being stored in large quantities in buildings throughout the UK; and what steps she is taking to educate the public on the fire risks of alcohol-based hand-rubs.
Answered by James Brokenshire
The Home Office has considered the fire risks associated with alcohol-based hand sanitisers in partnership with the National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC). The NFCC issued a press statement setting out the low risk of such products causing a fire and the need for a spark to come into contact with the substance.
Where alcohol-based hand sanitisers are stored in large quantities, the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 requires the responsible person for that premises to consider the fire risks and ensure these are mitigated to as low as reasonably practicable.
Asked by: Paul Beresford (Conservative - Mole Valley)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how much Government funding was allocated to biomedical research into myalgic encephalomyelitis in the financial years (a) 2017-18, (b) 2018-19 and (c) 2019-20.
Answered by Helen Whately - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The following table shows how much Government funding was allocated to biomedical research into myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), also known as chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) for financial years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20.
Financial Year | £ |
2017-18 | 226,470 |
2018-19 | 396,467 |
2019-20 | 443,719 |
In addition to the funding set out above, the National Institute for Health Research, funded through the Department, and the Medical Research Council have recently announced a £3.2 million award to fund research into potential genetic connections to ME/CFS. The project will analyse samples from 20,000 people with ME/CFS to search for genetic differences that may indicate underlying causes or increase the risk of developing the condition.
Asked by: Paul Beresford (Conservative - Mole Valley)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what recent estimate he has made of the number of workers who only hold contracts covered by the off payroll working rules.
Answered by Jesse Norman
The Tax Information and Impact Note (TIIN) published in July 2019 sets out that HMRC estimate that 170,000 individuals working through their own company, who would be employed if engaged directly, would be subject to the off-payroll working rules. Individuals may have multiple engagements through their own company, with some engagements subject to the off-payroll working rules and some not. Those who are complying with the existing rules should experience little impact. The TIIN can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rules-for-off-payroll-working-from-april-2020/rules-for-off-payroll-working-from-april-2020.
The impact of the delay to the changes of the off-payroll working rules will be published at the next fiscal event and will be subject to the scrutiny of the Office for Budget Responsibility.
Asked by: Paul Beresford (Conservative - Mole Valley)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of the covid-19 outbreak on workers covered by IR35 rules.
Answered by Jesse Norman
While no specific impact assessment has been made of the potential effect of COVID-19 on individuals affected by the off-payroll working rules (commonly known as IR35), the Government has recently announced that the reform to the off-payroll working rules for people contracting their services to large or medium-sized organisations outside the public sector will be delayed for one year, from 6 April 2020 until 6 April 2021. This is part of the additional support the Government is providing for businesses and individuals to deal with the economic impacts of COVID-19.
It is right for the Government to do whatever it can to support all parts of the labour market at this time. The Government remains committed to introducing this policy in order to address the unfairness of non-compliance with the existing off-payroll working rules. However, it also recognises that the reform is a significant change for both businesses and contractors. Delaying the reform will support them, as they will not need to implement and adjust to the reform until next year.
The Government very much values the contribution of flexible workers to the UK economy, but it is also under an obligation to ensure fairness between individuals who work in a similar way. The Government has published a factsheet which provides further information on the reform: https://bit.ly/2Uu50k8