Asked by: Victoria Collins (Liberal Democrat - Harpenden and Berkhamsted)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what guidance his Department has issued to Integrated Care Boards on clinically prioritising children whose symptoms are deteriorating while awaiting paediatric referral allocation.
Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is committed to ensuring that patient outcomes will be at the heart of building a National Health Service that is fit for the future.
National planning guidance sets expectations for systems to prioritise clinically urgent cases and those at risk of deterioration. The NHS triages patients waiting for elective care at a local level, ensuring the order in which patients are seen reflects clinical judgement on need as well as taking into account overall wait time.
We have committed to ensuring that integrated care boards and providers have interventions in place to reduce disparities for groups who face additional waiting list challenges, and primary and secondary care clinicians are to improve e-RS functionality, a national digital platform for referring patients into elective care, by including data to enable better prioritisation of children and young people.
The clinically led Getting It Right First Time children and young people programme continue to work with providers to ensure they are implementing best practice to improve children’s outcomes and waiting times across all medical and surgical specialities.
Asked by: Victoria Collins (Liberal Democrat - Harpenden and Berkhamsted)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps he is taking to (a) ensure that medical device manufacturers can verify the General Medical Device Nomenclature categories and associated charges used to calculate their annual registration fees under the Device Online Registration System and (b) minimise duplicative regulatory and registration costs for UK-based manufacturers arising from divergence between the UK regime and the EU’s EUDAMED system.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
When the registration system updates for collecting the new medical device registration fee go live on 1 April 2026, the system will have the functionality to show manufacturers the Global Medical Device Nomenclature (GMDN) Level 2 Categories they are being charged for. In the meantime, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) will make available, to customers who specifically request this, the breakdown of GMDN Level 2 Categories they would be charged for, based on their registrations this November. The MHRA has made it clear to customers that these are estimates only. This is part of an ongoing MHRA campaign to ask manufacturers to review their registrations before 31 March 2026, to ensure that they have only registered the products they place on the market. Another round of more accurate fee estimates in late February/early March 2026 is planned.
The MHRA has strengthened the safety and surveillance system for medical devices following the post-market surveillance legislation, SI 2024 No. 1368, that came into force on 16 June 2025.
In addition to the clear benefits to patient safety, the new legislation and resulting increased post-market surveillance requirements are a critical enabler of the MHRA’s more risk-proportionate, pro-innovation approach to regulation that is heralded in the NHS 10-year plan as the MHRA can be more confident in picking up safety issues in real world data.
The MHRA post market surveillance depends on the registration of all medical devices in the United Kingdom. The UK is not involved in the European database on medical devices, or EUDAMED, and the market surveillance mechanisms it supports.
Asked by: Victoria Collins (Liberal Democrat - Harpenden and Berkhamsted)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency’s proposed annual registration fees for medical devices under the Device Online Registration System on (a) small and (b) micro medical device manufacturers; and what steps he is taking to ensure that those fees do not disproportionately affect family-run and other niche low-volume manufacturers.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The new medical devices registration fee is designed to be proportionate to the breadth of presence of each manufacturer across the medical device market in Great Britain. In response to consultation feedback, the fee has been set at the minimum number of Global Medical Device Nomenclature (GMDN) Level 2 Categories that cover a manufacturer’s registered products. GMDN Level 2 Categories are sufficiently broad to cover the product range of a typical small or micro company. Based on the registration data held in November 2025, 55% of manufacturers will only pay a single fee of £300. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is currently contacting all manufacturers individually, setting out the number of GMDN Level 2 Categories they would be charged for, based on their registrations in November 2025. This is part of an ongoing MHRA campaign to ask manufacturers to review their registrations before 31 March 2026, to ensure that they have only registered products they manufacture and place on the market. This exercise is likely to increase the number of manufacturers only paying one fee of £300.
The MHRA has strengthened the safety and surveillance system for medical devices following the post-market surveillance legislation, SI 2024 No. 1368, that came into force on 16 June 2025.
In addition to the clear benefits to patient safety, the new legislation and resulting increased post-market surveillance requirements are a critical enabler of the MHRA’s more risk-proportionate, pro-innovation approach to regulation that is heralded in the NHS 10-year plan as the MHRA can be more confident in picking up safety issues in real world data.
Asked by: Victoria Collins (Liberal Democrat - Harpenden and Berkhamsted)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential impact of restrictions on television and online advertising of products high in fat, salt and sugar on levels of marketing through outdoor and brand-based advertising; and if he will consider extending restrictions to cover such advertising.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
As set out in our 10-Year Health Plan for England, we will take decisive action on the obesity crisis to ease the strain on our National Health Service and create the healthiest generation of children ever. We are already delivering the biggest public health reforms in a generation, including implementing restrictions on the advertising of less healthy food and drink before 9:00pm on television and at all times online from 5 January 2026.
Last year, the Government published the revised National Planning Policy Framework for local government, giving local authorities stronger, clearer powers to block new fast-food outlets near schools and where young people congregate. This will stop the relentless targeting of children and young people by the fast-food industry.
We also welcome the work by the metropolitan mayors to support the action to ban junk food marketing across public transport networks and public spaces that are controlled locally.
An impact assessment on the advertising restrictions was published on the GOV.UK website, which considered the impact of the restrictions on brand advertising and alternative media, including outdoor advertising, from the perspective of actions that advertisers of products that are high in fat, sugar or salt (HFSS) may take to mitigate the loss of revenue from the restrictions on television and online. The impact assessment made an assumption that approximately £14 million of lost revenue may be mitigated if HFSS advertisers took these actions.
We continue to review evidence of the impacts on children of advertising for less healthy food and drink products and will consider if and where further action is needed.
Asked by: Victoria Collins (Liberal Democrat - Harpenden and Berkhamsted)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department is taking to develop national guidelines and quality standards for vision rehabilitation services; and if he will commission the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to develop evidence-based standards in this area.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is the independent body that develops authoritative, evidence-based guidelines and quality standards for the health and care system on best practice. Topics for the development of NICE guidelines and quality standards are identified by the NICE prioritisation board, chaired by the NICE Chief Medical Officer, in line with its published prioritisation framework. NICE does not currently have any plans to develop a guideline or quality standard on vision rehabilitation. The NICE prioritisation board considered vision rehabilitation as a potential topic for the development of guidance in August 2024 and concluded that there is insufficient evidence in this area to develop useful guidance.
Asked by: Victoria Collins (Liberal Democrat - Harpenden and Berkhamsted)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will bring vision rehabilitation services under the same regulatory and monitoring framework as other adult social care services; and what assessment he has made of the potential merits of doing so.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
Under the Care Act 2014, local authorities have the duty to shape their care market and to commission a range of high-quality, sustainable, and person-centred care and support services to meet the diverse needs of all local people. This includes encouraging a wide range of service provision to ensure that people, including those with sight loss, have a choice of appropriate services and equipment that maximises independence.
Although the Care Quality Commission (CQC) is not currently required to assess vision rehabilitation services, as regulated activities under the Health and Social Care Act 2008, sensory services, including vision rehabilitation, do form part of CQC’s overall assessment of local authorities’ delivery of adult social care.
CQC assessments identify local authorities’ strengths and areas for development, in their delivery of their duties under part 1 of the Care Act. This facilitates the sharing of good practice and helps us to target support where it is most needed. It may be helpful to know that the CQC will report on sensory services when there is something important to highlight, for example, something being done well, innovative practice, or an area for improvement.
Asked by: Victoria Collins (Liberal Democrat - Harpenden and Berkhamsted)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many children with drug-resistant epilepsy have been prescribed cannabis-based medicinal products through private prescriptions in each of the last three years; and what assessment his Department has made of trends in the level of access to cannabis-based medicinal products for children with severe epilepsy unable to afford private prescriptions.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The NHS Business Services Authority does not hold the information in the form requested. National Health Service or private controlled drug prescription forms to do contain information on the condition being treated, or why a medicine has been prescribed.
No assessment has been made of trends in the level of access to cannabis-based medicinal products for children with severe epilepsy unable to afford private prescriptions.
The Department does not make provision for the funding of medicines outside of the NHS’ commissioning systems and it remains that the cost of treatments sought privately are the responsibility of patients.
Asked by: Victoria Collins (Liberal Democrat - Harpenden and Berkhamsted)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department is taking to support clinical trials for multi-compound cannabis-based medicinal products for the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy in children.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Department commissions research through the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR). The NIHR is funding two trials to investigate the safety and efficacy of cannabinoid treatments for drug-resistant epilepsy in both adults and children. Further detail on the trials can be found on the NIHR’s website, at the following link:
https://fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR131309
The Department is committed to ensuring that all patients, including those with epilepsy, have access to cutting-edge clinical trials and innovative, lifesaving treatments. We are working to fast-track clinical trials to drive global investment into life sciences, improve health outcomes, and accelerate the development of the medicines and therapies of the future, including treatments for epilepsy.
Asked by: Victoria Collins (Liberal Democrat - Harpenden and Berkhamsted)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps he is taking to ensure that Integrated Care Boards prioritise ADHD and autism assessments for children and young people approaching (a) key educational stages, (b) GCSEs and (c) post-16 transition points.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
We recognise that transitions between life stages can be particularly challenging for those who find change difficult, including many autistic people and people with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
The Medium-Term Planning Framework, published 24 October, was explicit that integrated care boards (ICBs) and providers are expected to optimise existing resources to reduce long waits for autism and ADHD assessments and improve the quality of assessments by implementing existing and new guidance, as published.
On 5 April 2023, NHS England published a national framework and operational guidance to help ICBs and the National Health Service to deliver improved outcomes for people referred to an autism assessment service. The guidance also sets out what support should be available before an assessment and following a recent diagnosis of autism. They make clear that autism assessment provision is needed throughout the lifespan and that ICBs should ensure that people of all ages can access an autism assessment locally.
NHS England established an ADHD taskforce which brought together those with lived experience with experts from the NHS, education, charity, and justice sectors to get a better understanding of the challenges affecting those with ADHD, including in accessing timely and equitable access to services and support. We are pleased that the final report was published on 6 November, and we are carefully considering its recommendations.
Asked by: Victoria Collins (Liberal Democrat - Harpenden and Berkhamsted)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department is taking to help tackle regional inequalities in access to gluten free prescriptions for patients with coeliac disease.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Decisions about the commissioning and funding of local health services are the responsibility of local integrated care boards (ICBs). It is the responsibility of ICBs, working with clinicians, service users, and patient groups, to develop local services and care pathways that meet patients’ needs.
NHS England guidance on Prescribing Gluten-Free foods in Primary Care states that commissioners should restrict the prescribing of gluten-free (GF) foods to bread and mixes only. Under the current legislation, ICBs may choose to further restrict product choice, or end prescribing of GF foods altogether, if they feel that this is appropriate for their population, whilst taking account of their legal duties to advance equality and having regard to reducing health inequalities.
The national prescribing position in England remains that GF bread and mixes can be provided to coeliac patients on an NHS prescription, and a wide range of these items continue to be listed in Part XV of the Drug Tariff. This means that prescribers can issue NHS prescriptions, based on a shared decision between prescriber and patient, while also being mindful of local and national guidance.
Health is largely a devolved matter and local health arrangements for GF prescribing in Scotland and Wales are a matter for the devolved administrations.