Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what proportion of his Department’s (a) advertising and (b) marketing expenditure was on (i) local newspapers in print and online, (ii) national newspapers in print and online, (iii) social media, (iv) search engines, (v) broadcast and on-demand television and (vi) other channels in the most recent year for which data is available.
Answered by Alex Burghart - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
The requested information is not centrally held, and complying with this request would incur a disproportionate cost to the department.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what proportion of her Department’s (a) advertising and (b) marketing expenditure was on (i) local newspapers in print and online, (ii) national newspapers in print and online, (iii) social media, (iv) search engines, (v) broadcast and on-demand television and (vi) other channels in the most recent year for which data is available.
Answered by Damian Hinds - Minister of State (Education)
In 2022/23, the department continued to deliver communications activity in support of ministerial priorities and the wider government communications plan across its remit of skills, schools and families. This included campaigns to support the government’s ambitious skills reform programme, maximising take up of childcare entitlements, inspiring more people to teach in schools and a new campaign to attract professionals to share their skills by becoming teachers in further education.
Most communications continue to be delivered in–house at no additional cost, as part of cross-government campaigns or at low cost by supporting and co–ordinating partners’ activity. Government marketing plays a crucial role in achieving operational and policy objectives, as well as driving behaviour change. Where paid-for communications are used, these are subject to the Cabinet Office’s advertising, marketing and communications spending controls. These controls ensure that, where taxpayer money is being spent on government communications, it is cost-effective, co-ordinated and reflects functional standards and professional best practices. Paid-for communications also comply with government and departmental procurement or governance policies and processes.
The latest period for which final and consolidated total spend across all Department for Education campaigns is available for the 2022/23 financial year. Spend across the channels requested is outlined below:
Media type | 22/23 |
TV and Broadcast Video on Demand | £7,769,044 |
Search Engine | £3,215,500 |
Social | £4,842,978 |
Print (local and national) | £222,623 |
Other channels | £10,664,887 |
Total | £26,715,032 |
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 1 March 2024 to Question 15320 on Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit: Mining, for what reason not all applicants for Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefits receive compensation.
Answered by Mims Davies - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
In order to be entitled to an award of Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit (IIDB), claimants must meet all the eligibility criteria set out in the relevant legislation. Claims may be disallowed prior to any medical assessment where certain entitlement criteria are not met (e.g. conditions around employed earner’s employment are not met, or the claimant does not satisfy the occupational criteria associated with the disease they are claiming for).
Claims for IIDB may also be disallowed following a medical assessment if the entitlement criteria are not met, for example, if it is established at assessment that the customer does not have one of the diseases set out in the relevant legislation.
There is not normally entitlement to a payable award of IIDB where disablement is assessed at less than 14%, with exceptions for some prescribed diseases as set out in legislation. In these cases, it is accepted that the customer is suffering from the prescribed disease, but they may not be entitled to a payable award of IIDB.
However, IIDB may still be payable for people who claim for more than one accident or disease and the total disablement, when the effects of all the accidents and diseases are added together, is 14% or more.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what discussions his Department has had with the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council on classification as an industrial injury of neurodegenerative conditions linked to repeated head impacts.
Answered by Mims Davies - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The Department is advised by the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council (IIAC), an independent scientific body, on changes to the list of occupational diseases for which Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit (IIDB) can be paid. IIAC is currently considering whether there is a link between certain neurodegenerative diseases and professional sportspeople.
IIAC has reviewed over 100 studies relating to ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) and will need to give more consideration to the evidence before it can make a decision. IIAC will also likely consult experts (neurologists) in this field and will then publish its findings when the investigation is complete.
It would be premature to speculate on how the Council’s investigation will progress or whether there is enough evidence of a link between certain neurodegenerative diseases and professional sportspeople to meet the threshold for a new ‘prescribed disease’ to be recommended by IIAC for the purpose of IIDB entitlement.
If recommendations are made by IIAC on this matter, they will be carefully considered by the Department.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what recent discussions she has had with NHS England on ensuring that cancer is (a) diagnosed and (b) treated as quickly as possible.
Answered by Andrew Stephenson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Department engages in ongoing discussions with NHS England, and is taking steps to reduce cancer diagnosis and treatment waiting times across England. The Government is working jointly with NHS England on implementing the delivery plan for tackling the COVID-19 backlogs in elective care, and plans to spend more than £8 billion from 2022/23 to 2024/25 to help drive up and protect elective activity, including cancer diagnosis and treatment activity.
Recently, following ministerial approval, NHS England consolidated the cancer waiting times standards on 1 October 2023. This followed the clinically led review of standards across the National Health Service, which recommended consolidating cancer waiting times from 10 standards into three. The three standards are: the Faster Diagnosis Standard (FDS), ensuing a maximum 28-day wait for communication of a definitive cancer or non-cancer diagnosis for patients referred urgently, or those identified by NHS cancer screening; a maximum 62-day wait to first treatment from urgent general practitioner referral, NHS cancer screening, or consultant upgrade; and a maximum 31-day wait from the decision to treat to any cancer treatment starting, for all cancer patients.
To achieve the FDS target and early diagnosis, NHS England has implemented a non-symptom specific pathway for patients who present with non-specific symptoms, or combinations of non-specific symptoms, that can indicate several different cancers, and a Best Timed Practice Pathway to ensure patients are diagnosed or told that cancer is ruled out within 28 days of an urgent referral.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of the condition of crown court (a) buildings and (b) other infrastructure.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The general condition of Crown Court buildings and other infrastructure is adequate, but I recognise that improvements are needed in some locations.
That is why we are investing £220 million in the two years to March 2025 for essential modernisation and repair work across the court and tribunal estate. This will minimise disruptions, retain the heritage of the estate, and ensure it is fit for the future.
We are working to ensure that those buildings most in need of investment are prioritised, providing a step forward in improving the quality of the court estate.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if his Department will make an assessment of the potential impact of the brightness of LED headlights on local communities.
Answered by Guy Opperman - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
All types of road vehicle headlamps are designed, tested and approved to internationally recognised standards to help prevent undue glare on a broad range of roads and environments. However, the Government is aware of concerns raised by members of the public and we intend to commission independent research shortly.
While there are clear safety, security and economic benefits associated with the use of LED lighting, the scientific evidence base on its adverse effects is less advanced. The government is committed to improving the evidence base to ensure we understand the effects more fully before making further policy interventions.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, if he will make a comparative assessment of levels of poverty in areas that (a) have and (b) have not received funding through the Levelling Up Fund.
Answered by Jacob Young - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
The Levelling Up Fund is one of a number of Government interventions designed to level up all parts of the UK. Through the Levelling Up Fund we have prioritised funding to areas most in need.
Our analysis of need takes into account a range of factors including skills, pay, productivity, transport connectivity and regeneration.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many shingles cases have led to complications requiring treatment in the last five years.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
The United Kingdom Health Security Agency (UKHSA) does not collect data on shingles cases that have led to complications requiring treatment. NHS England has provided the number of hospital admissions, with and without complications, from 2018/19 to 2022/23:
| 2018/19 | 2019/20 | 2020/21 | 2021/22 | 2022/23 |
Total with Complications | 1,521 | 1,552 | 1,259 | 1,486 | 1,401 |
Total without Complications | 2,008 | 2,024 | 1,623 | 1,806 | 1,730 |
Grand Total | 3,529 | 3,576 | 2,882 | 3,292 | 3,131 |
Source: Hospital Episode Statistics, NHS England
This should not be described as counts of people, however, as the same person may have more than one admission within any given time period. In addition, the UKHSA has published a paper showing the impact of the zostavax vaccine on the number of hospital admissions, which is available at the following link:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32641364/
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether she plans to introduce the shingles vaccine for adults aged over 65.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
The current policy is to offer the shingles vaccine to anyone who turned 65 and 70 years old after 1 September 2023, as well as to anyone aged 50 years and older who is at higher risk of serious complications. This policy has significantly improved the already very successful programme.
People aged 66 to 69 years old on 1 September 2023, who do not have a severely weakened immune system, will become eligible for shingles vaccination when they turn 70 years old. Those with a severely weakened immune system are eligible for the shingrix vaccine from 50 years old, due to their increased risk. Anyone who is unsure if they are at higher risk of complications from shingles should speak to their general practitioner. It is important that anyone eligible takes up this offer to protect themselves.
The Government’s policy on groups eligible for the shingles vaccination programme is based on recommendations by the independent expert body, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation and the scope and speed of any expansion of a programme is decided between the UK Health Security Agency, the Department, and NHS England.