Asked by: Jonathan Lord (Conservative - Woking)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps the Government is taking to tackle the effect of social media on the mental health of young people.
Answered by Jackie Doyle-Price
The Government recognises that social media can be a force for good, supporting education and helping people make positive connections with other people. However, as with most innovations, the Government is committed to taking action to ensure the risks of social media, particularly on the mental health of young people.
On 7 February, the United Kingdom Chief Medical Officers published their independent systematic map of evidence on screen and social media use in children and young people. They also published advice for parents and carers, giving tips on how to have a healthy balance with screen time. This is based on evidence around activities that are important for healthy child development such as sleep, exercise and education.
We want the UK to be the safest place to be online. The Government wants to work with internet and social media providers to achieve this, and we are clear we will take tougher action were needed. The Department of Health and Social Care has been working closely alongside colleagues at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport on their upcoming Online Harms White Paper. This White Paper will set out a range of legislative and non-legislative measures detailing how the Government will tackle online harms and set clear responsibilities for tech companies to keep UK citizens safe.
Asked by: Jonathan Lord (Conservative - Woking)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps his Department is taking to (a) improve the (i) prevention and (ii) management of meningitis in children and (b) enhance rehabilitation programmes for children who have had that disease.
Answered by Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford
Prevention of meningococcal disease is primarily achieved by vaccination. Two vaccines have been added to the national programme recently to help protect against meningitis and septicaemia; the meningitis B vaccine for babies and the meningitis ACWY vaccine for school leavers and university students. Where there is a case, local Public Health England Centres advise on the use of antibiotics and vaccination for appropriate close contacts.
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has produced both a quality standard (QS) and a clinical guideline (CG) relevant to bacterial meningitis and meningococcal septicaemia in children:
- QS19 - ‘Meningitis (bacterial) and meningococcal septicaemia in children and young people’ available at:
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/qs19
- CG102 - ‘Meningitis (bacterial) and meningococcal septicaemia in under 16s: recognition, diagnosis and management’ available at:
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg102
Basic inpatient care combined with out-patient rehabilitation is delivered by Specialty Multidisciplinary Teams who will engage with other specialties as required to address any additional identified needs following recovery from infection.
Clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) are responsible for commissioning rehabilitation services, in line with their assessment of the specific rehabilitation needs of different groups within their localities. In 2016, NHS England published “Commissioning Guidance for Rehabilitation”, which is intended to support local CCGs in the commissioning of local rehabilitation services across a range of settings.
Asked by: Jonathan Lord (Conservative - Woking)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how much funding has been invested by (a) his Department, (b) the National Institute for Health Research and (c) the Medical Research Council in research on (i) bowel, (ii) prostate, (iii) breast, (iv) lung, (v) testicular and (vi) throat cancer in each of the last seven years.
Answered by Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford
During the last seven years, the Department has funded research through its Policy Research Programme (PRP) and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The PRP commissions research to inform the development and implementation of policy, and the Department’s investment in cancer research is mainly through the NIHR.
Spend on research funded directly by NIHR is categorised by Health Research Classification System (HRCS) health categories including ‘cancer’. There are no HRCS health sub-categories such as for bowel cancer and other specific cancer sites and information on total annual NIHR spend on research on specific cancer sites is not held. A figure for total NIHR cancer research spend in 2016/17 is not yet available. Figures for the previous six years are as follows:
| £ million |
2010/11 | 100.9 |
2011/12 | 104.1 |
2012/13 | 133.2 |
2013/14 | 129.9 |
2014/15 | 134.7 |
2015/16 | 142.4 |
The Medical Research Council (MRC) is an independent research funding body which receives its grant in aid from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. MRC expenditure on cancer research includes research into the biology, causes, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of cancer as well as research on outcomes. Figures for MRC cancer research spend are provided below (source: National Cancer Research Institute). Data on spend from 2015 is not currently available.
| £ million |
2010 | 107.7 |
2011 | 112.1 |
2012 | 95.8 |
2013 | 79.9 |
2014 | 76.2 |
Information on MRC spend on research on specific cancer sites covering the seven year period requested is not held and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.
Asked by: Jonathan Lord (Conservative - Woking)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the average waiting time was for a GP appointment in (a) Woking constituency, (b) Surrey, (c) the South East and (d) England in each of the last seven years.
Answered by David Mowat
Information on the average waiting time for general practitioner (GP) appointments at local and national level is not collected or held centrally.
The GP Patient Survey, published by NHS England, asks respondents across England how long it took for them to see a GP or a nurse after contacting their practice. The full set of survey releases can be found here:
https://gp-patient.co.uk/surveys-and-reports
According to the latest release, published in July 2016:
- Almost two in five patients (37.6%) said that they were able to see or speak to someone on the same day as initially contacting the surgery,
- One in ten (10.7%) saw someone on the next working day,
- Three in ten patients (29.3%) saw or spoke to someone a few days later,
- 18.6% waited a week or more to see or speak to someone.
This does not take account of circumstances where patients express a preference to pre-book an appointment for a later date.
The Government is committed to improving access to general practice. By 2020, everyone will have access to routine evening and weekend appointments.
Asked by: Jonathan Lord (Conservative - Woking)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many hospital appointments were missed in (a) Woking constituency, (b) Surrey, (c) the South East and (d) England in each of the last seven years.
Answered by Philip Dunne
The numbers of missed appointments are not collected at constituency level.
The numbers of missed appointments reported by commissioning organisations are shown in the attached table.
Clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) replaced primary care trusts (PCTs) on 1 April 2013. The area covered by North West Surrey CCG includes Woking; prior to April 2013, all areas within Surrey were covered by Surrey PCT.
Asked by: Jonathan Lord (Conservative - Woking)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of progress in diagnosing and treating bowel cancer in the last seven years.
Answered by David Mowat
One-year survival from colorectal cancer has improved from 75% in 2010 to 77.2% for patients diagnosed in 2014, the most recent year for which figures are available. Screening is critical in improving earlier diagnosis of bowel cancers and improving outcomes. The current screening test, guaiac faecal occult blood test will be replaced with a new easier to use screening test (Faecal Immunochemical Test for haemoglobin, FIT) from April 2018. In addition, from April 2016 NHS England has begun to commission the Bowel Scope Screening Programme, which will ultimately offer a flexi-sigmoidoscopy (bowel scope) to all 55 year olds in England.
Asked by: Jonathan Lord (Conservative - Woking)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the costs and benefits to the NHS of widening access to the HPV vaccine known as Gardasil.
Answered by Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford
The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme for girls was introduced in 2008 to reduce future incidence of cervical cancer. This was based on the recommendation of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), the independent expert body that advises ministers on immunisation matters, and took into account a range of evidence including costs and benefits to the National Health Service.
In October 2013 JCVI considered a potential extension of the HPV programme to adolescent boys. Modelling was requested to re-examine the impact and cost-effectiveness of extending the HPV vaccination programme to adolescent boys which should be completed later this year. JCVI will then make a formal assessment of the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination for boys.
JCVI advised that a programme for men who have sex with men (MSM) is introduced for those aged up to 45, subject to procuring the vaccine at a cost effective price. Following this advice, Public Health England and its partners have introduced a pilot HPV programme for MSM in England in 2016. The pilot will continue in 2017-18 and will inform decisions on the potential national roll-out of a HPV vaccination programme for MSM.
Asked by: Jonathan Lord (Conservative - Woking)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the per capita funding for the (a) North West Surrey, (b) Guilford and Waverley, (c) Surrey Downs, (d) Richmond, (e) Hounslow, (f) Hillingdon, (g) Slough, (h) Windsor, Ascot and Maidenhead, (i) Bracknell and Ascot and (j) Surrey Heath clinical commissioning groups was in (i) 2014-15 and (ii) 2015-16.
Answered by Philip Dunne
The following table sets out the per capita funding to all of the clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) requested above, in both 2014-15 and 2015-16.
CCG | 2014-15 Per capita allocation (£) | 2015-16 Per capita allocation (£) |
NHS North West Surrey | 1,085 | 1,090 |
NHS Guildford and Waverley | 1,028 | 1,033 |
NHS Surrey Downs | 1,089 | 1,098 |
NHS Richmond | 997 | 1,018 |
NHS Hounslow | 951 | 1,009 |
NHS Hillingdon | 974 | 1,045 |
NHS Slough | 1,029 | 1,084 |
NHS Windsor, Ascot and Maidenhead | 951 | 1,000 |
NHS Bracknell and Ascot | 969 | 1,018 |
NHS Surrey Heath | 1,159 | 1,168 |