Asked by: Robert Flello (Labour - Stoke-on-Trent South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to ensure compliance with safety regulations and basic standards of hygiene at abortion clinics.
Answered by Jane Ellison
One representation has been received in relation to the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) inspection of BPAS Richmond. The CQC is responsible for ensuring that requirements under the Health and Social Care (HSC) Act 2008 are met by the providers of termination of pregnancy services including meeting the fundamental standards of quality and safety as set out in Part 3 to the 2014 Regulations, and Regulation 20 of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009, which is specific to independent sector termination of pregnancy providers. The CQC is responsible for ensuring that the requirements under the HSC Act 2008 are maintained through a system of monitoring and, where appropriate, inspection visits. It is for the CQC and the provider to address required and recommended actions identified following an inspection.
Independent sector providers are also required to comply with the Department of Health’s Required Standard Operating Procedures.
Departmental officials meet regularly with representatives from the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) but have not met since the CQC report on BPAS Richmond was published.
Asked by: Robert Flello (Labour - Stoke-on-Trent South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if will he take steps to ensure that British Pregnancy Advisory Service abortion clinics do not act outside the licence for anaesthetics and do not share single doses between patients.
Answered by Jane Ellison
One representation has been received in relation to the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) inspection of BPAS Richmond. The CQC is responsible for ensuring that requirements under the Health and Social Care (HSC) Act 2008 are met by the providers of termination of pregnancy services including meeting the fundamental standards of quality and safety as set out in Part 3 to the 2014 Regulations, and Regulation 20 of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009, which is specific to independent sector termination of pregnancy providers. The CQC is responsible for ensuring that the requirements under the HSC Act 2008 are maintained through a system of monitoring and, where appropriate, inspection visits. It is for the CQC and the provider to address required and recommended actions identified following an inspection.
Independent sector providers are also required to comply with the Department of Health’s Required Standard Operating Procedures.
Departmental officials meet regularly with representatives from the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) but have not met since the CQC report on BPAS Richmond was published.
Asked by: Robert Flello (Labour - Stoke-on-Trent South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether he has had discussions with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority after its authorisation of a licence for gene editing of human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 on the process of ethical approval being granted for such a licence.
Answered by George Freeman
The Department has not had any discussions with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) after its authorisation of a licence for gene editing of human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 about the process of ethical approval being granted for such a licence.
The Francis Crick Institute, which made the licence application to the HFEA, is intending to place copies of the information given to patients or donors explaining this research on its website, once the final draft has been agreed.
There is no statutory requirement for ethical approval to be in place before an HFEA research licence can be granted. However, the HFEA has developed guidance for its licensing committee that such approval should be in place before a licence is granted and research is allowed to proceed.
In 2012, none of the three licences granted had ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on each licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place. In 2013, five research licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2014, seven licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2015, one of the 15 licences granted did not have ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on the licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place.
Asked by: Robert Flello (Labour - Stoke-on-Trent South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will take steps to ensure that information given to patients or donors explaining research to which they have consented on genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 will be publicly available.
Answered by George Freeman
The Department has not had any discussions with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) after its authorisation of a licence for gene editing of human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 about the process of ethical approval being granted for such a licence.
The Francis Crick Institute, which made the licence application to the HFEA, is intending to place copies of the information given to patients or donors explaining this research on its website, once the final draft has been agreed.
There is no statutory requirement for ethical approval to be in place before an HFEA research licence can be granted. However, the HFEA has developed guidance for its licensing committee that such approval should be in place before a licence is granted and research is allowed to proceed.
In 2012, none of the three licences granted had ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on each licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place. In 2013, five research licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2014, seven licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2015, one of the 15 licences granted did not have ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on the licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place.
Asked by: Robert Flello (Labour - Stoke-on-Trent South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the guidance is on licences applied for to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority being granted before receiving ethical approval; and what proportion of such licences have been so granted in each of the last three years.
Answered by George Freeman
The Department has not had any discussions with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) after its authorisation of a licence for gene editing of human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 about the process of ethical approval being granted for such a licence.
The Francis Crick Institute, which made the licence application to the HFEA, is intending to place copies of the information given to patients or donors explaining this research on its website, once the final draft has been agreed.
There is no statutory requirement for ethical approval to be in place before an HFEA research licence can be granted. However, the HFEA has developed guidance for its licensing committee that such approval should be in place before a licence is granted and research is allowed to proceed.
In 2012, none of the three licences granted had ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on each licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place. In 2013, five research licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2014, seven licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2015, one of the 15 licences granted did not have ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on the licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place.
Asked by: Robert Flello (Labour - Stoke-on-Trent South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many mental health patients underwent electric shock therapy treatment in each of the last five years.
Answered by Alistair Burt
The information is not available in the format requested.
Asked by: Robert Flello (Labour - Stoke-on-Trent South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many (a) hospitals and (b) treatment centres use electric shock therapy for the treatment of patients with mental health problems.
Answered by Alistair Burt
The information is not available in the format requested.
Asked by: Robert Flello (Labour - Stoke-on-Trent South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, when he plans to publish the responses received to his Department's pre-consultation on reducing legal costs in clinical negligence claims.
Answered by Ben Gummer
Feedback from the pre-consultation on the introduction of fixed recoverable costs (FRC) in clinical negligence claims has been used to inform the development of the FRC policy. We intend to publish a summary of the feedback within the consultation document in due course.
Asked by: Robert Flello (Labour - Stoke-on-Trent South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, which groups were consulted in preparation of the equality impact assessment for the introduction of fixed recoverable costs in medical negligence cases.
Answered by Ben Gummer
The consultation stage assessment for the introduction of fixed recoverable costs for clinical negligence is work in progress. The Department has established a working group to look at the impact of the proposal on equalities, health inequalities and families. Membership (which has not been finalised) currently includes representatives of claimant lawyers, defence lawyers, patients and the National Health Service. We will seek views on the impact of the policy on equalities, health inequalities and families within the consultation.