Asked by: Greg Mulholland (Liberal Democrat - Leeds North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the average hourly earnings were of his Department's (a) BME and (b) non-BME employees in (i) 2015 and (ii) 2016.
Answered by Jane Ellison
The information requested (as at 31 March in each of the two years) is presented below. The figures given take into consideration only information about staff who have formally declared their ethnicity.
| Average Hourly Rate 2015 | Average Hourly Rate 2016 |
Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) Staff | £18.50 | £19.03 |
Non-Black and Minority Ethnic (Non-BME) Staff | £24.23 | £24.34 |
17% of the Department’s staff are BME which is above the Civil Service average. The difference in average hourly rates between BME and non BME staff is due to there being a higher proportion of BME staff in junior grades at present.
To encourage recruitment and promotion of talented individuals from a BME background, the Department has undertaken several initiatives including, but not limited to, blind recruitment forms, mandatory unconscious bias training for all staff and a suite of other Diversity and Inclusion training, such as Race Awareness, Positive Action Pathways, and Future Leaders Schemes.
Asked by: Greg Mulholland (Liberal Democrat - Leeds North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, following the announcement on Twitter by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Life Sciences on 15 April 2016 that a Managed Access Agreement had been reached for the Translarna drug, for what reasons NICE granted a further eight weeks on 4 May 2016 for discussions to take place.
Answered by George Freeman
On 15 April 2016, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) announced in its final draft guidance that it was recommending Translarna (ataluren) for the treatment of children aged five and over with Duchenne muscular dystrophy caused by a nonsense mutation.
Translarna was recommended only when (a) the company provides it at a discounted price to the National Health Service under the patient access scheme agreed with the Department and (b) that NHS England and the manufacturer, PTC Therapeutics, in conjunction with patient representatives, agree a managed access agreement setting out (i) the criteria for starting and stopping treatment, which individual patients would be required to agree, (ii) data collection to address considerable uncertainty in the evidence base and (iii) additional confidential financial controls between the company and NHS England.
On 4 May 2016, NICE announced that it was allowing extra time for further discussions on access arrangements for Translarna to take place before its final guidance is published. NHS England and PTC Therapeutics have been asked to reach agreement on the cost of the drug to the NHS by 7 July 2016.
Asked by: Greg Mulholland (Liberal Democrat - Leeds North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether purdah arrangements for the EU referendum apply to policy statements to be published by NHS England on the commissioning of treatments.
Answered by George Freeman
Whilst the pre-election guidance for the European Union referendum has yet to be published, it is not anticipated that it would prevent the routine publication of clinical commissioning policy statements which are a ‘business as usual’ function of NHS England.
The Cabinet Office publishes pre-election guidance for civil servants which also applies to NHS England and other arm’s length bodies. This can be found at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/election-guidance-for-civil-servants
Asked by: Greg Mulholland (Liberal Democrat - Leeds North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to ensure that the NHS England consultation on a proposed method to support investment decisions in specialised commissioning launched on 12 April 2016 does not disadvantage potential treatments for rare diseases.
Answered by George Freeman
The consultation on a proposed method to support investment decisions in specialised commissioning closed on 11 May 2016. All responses will now be independently analysed, and NHS England will consider the report before making a final decision on the method to be used by the Clinical Priorities Advisory Group (CPAG) when it meets in June 2016 to look at areas for future investment.
In recognition that there may be limited evidence to support proposed treatments for rare conditions, NHS England has proposed that the CPAG may recommend that interventions for rare conditions are funded where there is limited published evidence on clinical effectiveness. CPAG will also be able to seek advice from NHS England’s Rare Diseases Advisory Group - whose membership comprises of both clinicians and patient and public representatives.
To ensure people with rare diseases are not disadvantaged, NHS England’s consultation includes an Equality Impact Assessment which explicitly considers the impact of the proposed process on people with rare conditions, and respondents to consultation have been invited to submit their views on this issue.
Asked by: Greg Mulholland (Liberal Democrat - Leeds North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 15 March 2016 to Question 29900, on tuberous sclerosis, for what reasons the policy statement for the commissioning of Everolimus for treating angiomyolipomas has not yet been published; and when he plans to publish that statement.
Answered by George Freeman
The policy statement for the commissioning of Everolimus for treating angiomyolipomas has not yet been published owing to delays experienced when incorporating the needs of children into the policy.
Those issues have now been resolved and the policy is due to be published imminently on NHS England’s website.
Asked by: Greg Mulholland (Liberal Democrat - Leeds North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps his Department is taking to implement the recommendations of the Boorman Review of NHS health and well-being services, published in November 2009.
Answered by Ben Gummer
The Government has supported the National Health Service in implementing the Review’s recommendations by commissioning NHS Employers to support NHS trusts in improving the health and well-being of their staff.
Progress has been made with NHS staff sickness absence rates falling from 4.48% at the time of the Boorman review to 4.25% according to the latest sickness absence data[1] from the Health and Social Care Information Centre.
However, NHS sickness absence remains too high. NHS Employers is currently working with NHS England and Public Health England on the £5 million initiative announced last year:
https://www.england.nhs.uk/2015/09/improving-staff-health/
which includes a major drive for improved NHS staff health, spearheaded by a group of leading NHS hospital, mental health, ambulance, community and clinical commissioning group employers, in partnership with NHS Employers and Public Health England.
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has also published evidence-based guidance for all NHS employers on how to improve the health of their staff. An audit of the implementation of the guidance carried out by the Royal College of Physicians in 2013 identified that 121 trusts then had a board member responsible for staff health and wellbeing and 65% of trusts audited had an overarching health and wellbeing strategy in place. Further details of the audit findings can be found at:
Asked by: Greg Mulholland (Liberal Democrat - Leeds North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to ensure accurate and early diagnosis of Kawasaki disease.
Answered by George Freeman
The Government published the UK Strategy for Rare Diseases in November 2013. The strategy contains over 50 commitments to ensure people living with a rare disease, such as Kawasaki disease, have access to the best evidence-based care and treatment that health and social services, working with charities, researchers and industry can provide.
It is the responsibility of the professional regulators to set the standards and outcomes for education and training and approve training curricular to ensure newly qualified healthcare professionals are equipped with the knowledge, skills and attitudes to provide high quality patient care. This includes training in both scarlet fever and Kawasaki disease.
Health Education England works with bodies that set curricula such as the General Medical Council and the Royal Colleges to seek to ensure training meets the needs of patients.
The Department and its arm’s length bodies have not published any specific guidance on the similarities between Kawasaki disease and scarlet fever.
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s guideline on the assessment and initial management of fever in under 5s sets out the circumstances in which a diagnosis of Kawasaki disease should be considered, and Public Health England (PHE) has endeavoured to keep healthcare professionals, schools and the general public informed of the increased incidence of scarlet fever through timely information, news stories and updates on the PHE website and by using social and other media. These awareness raising measures assist general practitioners and other frontline healthcare professionals in reaching a correct diagnosis more quickly and encourage patients to seek medical advice early so that suspected cases receive prompt antibiotic treatment to reduce the risk of complications and limit further transmission.
Asked by: Greg Mulholland (Liberal Democrat - Leeds North West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what guidance his Department provides to medical practitioners on the similarities between Kawasaki disease and scarlet fever.
Answered by George Freeman
The Government published the UK Strategy for Rare Diseases in November 2013. The strategy contains over 50 commitments to ensure people living with a rare disease, such as Kawasaki disease, have access to the best evidence-based care and treatment that health and social services, working with charities, researchers and industry can provide.
It is the responsibility of the professional regulators to set the standards and outcomes for education and training and approve training curricular to ensure newly qualified healthcare professionals are equipped with the knowledge, skills and attitudes to provide high quality patient care. This includes training in both scarlet fever and Kawasaki disease.
Health Education England works with bodies that set curricula such as the General Medical Council and the Royal Colleges to seek to ensure training meets the needs of patients.
The Department and its arm’s length bodies have not published any specific guidance on the similarities between Kawasaki disease and scarlet fever.
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s guideline on the assessment and initial management of fever in under 5s sets out the circumstances in which a diagnosis of Kawasaki disease should be considered, and Public Health England (PHE) has endeavoured to keep healthcare professionals, schools and the general public informed of the increased incidence of scarlet fever through timely information, news stories and updates on the PHE website and by using social and other media. These awareness raising measures assist general practitioners and other frontline healthcare professionals in reaching a correct diagnosis more quickly and encourage patients to seek medical advice early so that suspected cases receive prompt antibiotic treatment to reduce the risk of complications and limit further transmission.