Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what the terms of reference are for her Department's review of the vaccine damage compensation scheme; which body is responsible for undertaking the review; and what estimate she has made of when the review will be completed.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
All routine policy, including the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS), is reviewed on a regular basis. My Rt hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is currently looking into aspects of the scheme, following recent meetings with interested stakeholders.
Separately, work is underway with the scheme’s administrator, the NHS Business Service Authority, to review processes and make administrative changes, to improve the scheme within the current legislative framework. Formal consideration of whether any reforms to the VDPS are necessary will form part of Module 4 of the COVID-19 Inquiry, chaired by the Rt Hon Baroness Heather Carol Hallett DBE.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on what date NHS England informed patients receiving the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine that there were safety risks of vaccine-induced thrombosis with thrombocytopenia associated with the vaccine.
Answered by Helen Whately - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Department of Health and Social Care has indicated that it will not be possible to answer this question within the usual time period. An answer is being prepared and will be provided as soon as it is available.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps NHS England took to ensure that informed consent was given by recipients of the Oxford-AstraZeneca covid-19 vaccine.
Answered by Helen Whately - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Department of Health and Social Care has indicated that it will not be possible to answer this question within the usual time period. An answer is being prepared and will be provided as soon as it is available.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether (a) his Department and (b) the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency has received data from Astra Zeneca on the potential serious adverse effects of its covid-19 vaccine for a small number of recipients.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
The Department has not directly received data from AstraZeneca regarding potential adverse effects of their COVID-19 vaccine Vaxzevria, as it is not the appropriate body to receive this information. It instead relies on the expert advice of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
All vaccine manufacturers have a legal responsibility to mitigate risk and monitor the safety and performance of vaccines throughout the product lifecycle. This includes a legal responsibility to transmit reports of suspected adverse reactions received directly to the MHRA. Following the MHRA’s receipt of the first Yellow Card reports of suspected thrombosis and associated thrombocytopaenia associated with the Vaxzevria vaccine in February 2021, AstraZeneca provided the Commission on Human Medicines’ Vaccine Benefit Risk Expert Working Group an analysis of the age stratified risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine. This was assessed by the Commission on Human Medicines, with the Patient Information updated to state the risks of these events.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, when the NHS England South West Complaints Team plans to provide a substantive response to the complaint made by the hon. member for Christchurch on behalf of a constituent under reference 2312-2050136; for what reason there has been no response to the complaint from the South West dental commissioning team; and what the contact details are for the person in charge of that team.
Answered by Andrea Leadsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
I thank the hon. Member for Christchurch for bringing this matter to my attention. NHS England has advised that the trust has received the hon. Member's correspondence, and will respond in due course. In July 2023, the responsibility for primary care complaints, including dentistry, moved to local integrated care boards.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many complaints have been received by the NHS England South West Complaints Team in each of the last six months; how many emanated from the Dorset Integrated Care Board; and how many of those have been outstanding for more than two months.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
The South West Complaints Team transferred from NHS England to the NHS Somerset Integrated Care Board (ICB), who now host the NHS South West Collaborative Commissioning Hub, on 1 July 2023. This followed the delegation of pharmacy, optometry, and dentistry associated complaints on 1 April 2023. The following table shows the number of complaints the South West Complaints Team received, and the proportion that were investigated for NHS Dorset ICB, each month from October 2023 to March 2024:
Month | Total received | Number from NHS Dorset ICB |
October 2023 | 181 | 25 |
November 2023 | 196 | 31 |
December 2023 | 119 | 21 |
January 2024 | 208 | 29 |
February 2024 | 191 | 44 |
March 2024 | 156 | 32 |
Total | 1,051 | 182 |
Of the 1,051 total complaints, 86 have been outstanding for more than two months. Of the 182 complaints from NHS Dorset ICB, 14 have been outstanding for more than two months.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to the oral contribution by the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department of Health and Social Care during the debate on Covid-19: Response and Excess Deaths on Thursday 18 April 2024, Official Report, column 537, whether she has had recent discussions with (a) NICE and (b) the MHRA on their progress on reaching a decision on whether to recommend the use of Evusheld 2 to prevent covid-19.
Answered by Andrew Stephenson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Department meets with the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) regularly to discuss a range of issues, including access to medicines. The NICE has formally started its appraisal of AZD-3152, also known as sipavibart and referred to as Evusheld 2, ahead of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency’s (MHRA) decision on whether it should be given a United Kingdom marketing authorisation, and expects to invite stakeholder submissions in April 2024. Timelines for both the NICE’s guidance and licensing depend on data from the SUPERNOVA trial being available. AstraZeneca intends to submit clinical data to the NICE and the MHRA at the same time, with the aim that both organisations are able to reach decisions as close together as possible. If AZD-3152 is recommended as clinically and cost effective by the NICE, the National Health Service in England will be under a statutory requirement to fund AZD-3152 for eligible patients, in line with the NICE’s recommendations.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how much the administration of the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme cost the NHS Business Services Authority in (a) 2021, (b) 2022 and (c) 2023.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
The NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) administers the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme, on behalf of the Department. Administration costs for the scheme were £600,000, £8.8 million, and £16.1 million for April 2021 to March 2022, April 2022 to March 2023, and April 2023 to March 2024, respectively. Payments made by the NHSBSA for the provision of medical records totalled £1,200, £72,000, and £73,100, for the same periods. The figures are provided to the nearest decimal place.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what the cost to NHS England has been of reimbursing GP practices for providing services to (a) non-UK and (b) non-registered UK citizens in each of the last three years for which information is available.
Answered by Andrea Leadsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
General practices (GPs) are paid for providing essential services to all their patients via global sum payments, which are weighted to take patient needs into account. Therefore, there are no dedicated GP payments for providing services to non-United Kingdom or non-registered UK citizens, and the Department does not hold data on GP patient lists by nationality.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what evidence of (a) identity and (b) immigration status GPs require from patients seeking to access their services; and whether her Department provides guidance to GPs on ensuring that identification provided by those people is genuine.
Answered by Andrea Leadsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Patients have the legal right to choose a general practice (GP) that best suits their needs. An individual should not be refused registration or appointments because they do not have proof of address or personal identification. Patients do not need to provide proof of address or immigration status, identification, or a National Health Service number to register with a GP. The vast majority of migrants are required to pay the Immigration Health Surcharge when applying for a visa to stay in the United Kingdom for longer than six months.