Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Haltemprice and Howden)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, which NHS trusts have paused or suspended pilots of Palantir Foundry.
Answered by Will Quince
These National Health Service trusts have paused pilots of Palantir Foundry:
- Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust;
- East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust;
- London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust;
- Milton Keynes University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust;
- Newcastle Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust;
- Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust;
- University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Foundation Trust;
- University Hospitals Dorset NHS Foundation Trust; and
- University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust.
These NHS trusts have suspended pilots of Palantir Foundry:
- Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital; and
- University Hospital Plymouth NHS Trust.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Haltemprice and Howden)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to the use of Foundry, a Palantir product, by NHS England as part of some of its pilots of the collection and dissemination of the Faster Data Flow Acute Data Set, how much money from the public purse has been spent on the elective care recovery pilots involving the use of Palantir Foundry to date; and if he will provide a breakdown of (a) spending on individual trusts’ implementation costs and (b) payments made to (i) Palantir and (ii) consultants.
Answered by Will Quince
The elective recovery programme aims to help trusts across England better plan, schedule and manage patients through the Elective pathway. The spend-to-date on the pilot is £20.2 million. This includes £11.2 million on implementation within individual trusts. The spend-to-date includes £1.2 million paid to Palantir to accelerate elective surgical waiting list validation, correctly prioritise patients awaiting treatment and improve theatre utilisation. This also includes £5.4 million to external consultants to help with the discovery stage, delivery, strategic direction, management and training within the programme. The remaining £2.4 million has been spent on internal consultant teams within the Commissioning Support Units.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Haltemprice and Howden)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will publish his Department's internal assessments of the performance of the pilots of Palantir Foundry at (a) Chelsea and Westminster, (b) the Royal Free London, (c) Barts Health and (d) Milton Keynes University Hospital NHS Trusts.
Answered by Will Quince
The Improving Elective Care Coordination for Patients Programme is one of the two main Foundry pilots. It supports trusts to effectively deliver care through care coordination.
The Chelsea and Westminster pilot has so far achieved these benefits:
- 79% of patients on waiting lists have been assessed for accuracy, leading to 27,200 patients being removed for example if they no longer need their procedure;
- 3,507 patients have been reprioritised to date;
- 3,279 theatre actions have been created to manage patients through the 6-4-2 process, a model to improve operating theatre productivity, safety, and patient experience;
- 4,372 booking requests have been completed;
- waiting lists for 392 consultants have been managed through care coordination;
- there has been a 55% reduction of bookings cancelled on the day due to missing Pre-Operative Assessment from, 2.89% to 1.29%; and
- patients with suspected cancer had their first appointment on average two days sooner.
The Royal Free London, Barts Health and Milton Keynes University Hospital Trusts pilots have not yet gone live.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Haltemprice and Howden)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of her Department's counter-disinformation unit on freedom of expression.
Answered by Paul Scully
The Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU) leads HMG’s operational and policy response to understand and counter disinformation and attempts to manipulate the information environment, with the potential to impact domestic audiences. In addition to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and COVID-19, the CDU has considered disinformation relating to key national events such as Operation London Bridge and elections.
Freedom of expression and the media are essential qualities of any functioning democracy; people must be allowed to discuss and debate issues freely. The CDU’s work is consistent with the government’s principles and values on protecting freedom of expression and promoting a free, open, and secure internet.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Haltemprice and Howden)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what policy areas the Counter Disinformation Unit focuses on in addition to Covid-19 and Ukraine.
Answered by Paul Scully
The Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU) leads HMG’s operational and policy response to understand and counter disinformation and attempts to manipulate the information environment, with the potential to impact domestic audiences. In addition to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and COVID-19, the CDU has considered disinformation relating to key national events such as Operation London Bridge and elections.
Freedom of expression and the media are essential qualities of any functioning democracy; people must be allowed to discuss and debate issues freely. The CDU’s work is consistent with the government’s principles and values on protecting freedom of expression and promoting a free, open, and secure internet.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Haltemprice and Howden)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the Government's counter-disinformation strategy.
Answered by Ben Wallace
I regularly discuss the Government’s counter-disinformation strategy with Ministerial colleagues as part of routine cross-Government meetings.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Haltemprice and Howden)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 6 May 2020 to Question 8948 on Tigray: Humanitarian Situation, how many people were extradited from the US to the UK for (a) violent and (b) non-violent crimes in each year since 2018.
Answered by Tom Tugendhat - Minister of State (Home Office) (Security)
Year | Total number extradited | Total number extradited for non-violent offences | Total number extradited for violent offences |
2018 | 5 | 2 | 3 |
2019 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
2020 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
2021 | 7 | 2 | 5 |
2022 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
2023* | 3 | 1 | 2 |
* Figures until 24 February 2023
For the above table, we have taken non-violent offences to include:
These figures provide updates on previously published statistics for 2018. All figures are from local management information and have not been quality assured to the level of published National Statistics. As such they should be treated as provisional and therefore subject to change. The figures do not include Scotland, which deals with its own extradition cases.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Haltemprice and Howden)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the Answer of 4 July 2019 to Question 271379 on Extradition: USA, how many people were extradited from the UK to the United States for non-violent crimes in each year since 2018.
Answered by Tom Tugendhat - Minister of State (Home Office) (Security)
Year | Total number extradited | Total number extradited for non-violent offences | Total number extradited for violent offences |
2018 | 7 | 3 | 4 |
2019 | 13 | 9 | 4 |
2020 | 10 | 7 | 3 |
2021 | 7 | 4 | 3 |
2022 | 16 | 15 | 1 |
2023* | 1 | 1 | 0 |
* Figures until 23 February 2023
For the above two tables, we have taken non-violent offences to include:
These figures provide updates on previously published statistics for 2018 (table 1) and for 2018 and 2019 (table 2). All figures are from local management information and have not been quality assured to the level of published National Statistics. As such they should be treated as provisional and therefore subject to change. The figures do not include Scotland, which deals with its own extradition cases.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Haltemprice and Howden)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people were extradited from the UK to the US for (a) violent and (b) non-violent crimes in each year since 2003.
Answered by Tom Tugendhat - Minister of State (Home Office) (Security)
To provide this information in the requested breakdown could only be done at disproportionate cost.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Haltemprice and Howden)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people were extradited from the US to the UK for (a) violent and (b) non-violent crimes in each year since 2003.
Answered by Tom Tugendhat - Minister of State (Home Office) (Security)
To provide this information in the requested breakdown could only be done at disproportionate cost.