Asked by: Helen Morgan (Liberal Democrat - North Shropshire)
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 protect household contacts of the immunosuppressed from covid-19 infection.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is committed to protecting those most vulnerable to COVID-19 through vaccination, as guided by the independent Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI). The primary aim of the national COVID-19 vaccination programme remains the prevention of severe illness, involving hospitalisation and/or death, arising from COVID-19.
The JCVI’s advice for autumn 2024 noted that in the era of high population immunity to COVID-19, and with all cases due to highly transmissible Omicron sub-variants, any protection offered by the vaccine against the transmission of infection from one person to another was expected to be extremely limited. On this basis, the JCVI did not advise offering vaccination to household contacts of people with immunosuppression. The Government accepted the JCVI’s advice for autumn 2024, with both the advice and the Government’s response available at the following link:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-accepts-advice-on-2024-autumn-covid-vaccine-programme
Household contacts were therefore not offered vaccination in the autumn 2024 campaign. On 13 November 2024, the JCVI published advice on the COVID-19 vaccination programme covering vaccination in 2025 and spring 2026. In line with its advice for the autumn 2024 campaign, the JCVI did not advise COVID-19 vaccination for household contacts of people with immunosuppression. This advice is available at the following link:
The Government accepted the JCVI’s advice on eligibility for the spring and autumn 2025 COVID-19 vaccination programme. The Government is considering the advice for spring 2026 carefully and will respond in due course.
Those with concerns are advised to discuss these with their general practitioner or healthcare professional.
Asked by: Johanna Baxter (Labour - Paisley and Renfrewshire South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many Integrated Care Boards in England provide Covid Medicines Delivery Units.
Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Department and NHS England do not collect or hold this information centrally. Integrated care boards (ICBs) are responsible for making funding available and for arranging access to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommended COVID-19 therapeutics, in line with its Rapid guideline: managing COVID-19, which is available at the following link:
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng191
ICBs will establish services to meet the needs of their local populations, which might include COVID-19 Medicines Delivery Units, but could also include other access options such as primary and community care, or outreach services. Patients can find out about local services at the following link:
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/covid-19/treatments-for-covid-19/
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to the Answer of 20 January 2025 to Question 24011 on Coronavirus: Disease Control, when he plans to update the National Infection Prevention and Control Manual and Health Technical Memoranda guidelines to ensure (a) recognition of the role of airborne transmission of SARS-Cov-2 and (b) appropriate guidance on (i) the use of FFP3 masks, (ii) improved standards of ventilation and air filter devices in (A) clinical and (B) non-clinical healthcare settings and (iii) other measures to limit airborne transmission of (1) Covid-19 and (2) other respiratory viruses; and if he will take steps to ensure the distribution of those guidelines to all employers and providers of healthcare workers.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The NHS England National Infection Prevention and Control Manual (NIPCM) provides adaptable guidance to support local decision-making. Healthcare organisations are responsible for conducting dynamic risk assessments to determine when enhanced infection control measures, such as the use of FFP3 masks, are necessary. These assessments take into account factors such as ventilation quality, local infection prevalence and specific care environments.
Should new evidence emerge that warrants updates, the guidance will be reviewed and revised accordingly by NHS England and UKHSA to ensure the highest standards of infection prevention and control are maintained across healthcare settings. Any updates will be disseminated appropriately to healthcare employers and providers to support consistent implementation
Asked by: Lord Kempsell (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic following the publication by the Government of the United States on 25 January of the CIA’s analysis that the SARS-COV2 virus most likely originated in a laboratory.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
We recognise that there are questions that need to be answered about the origin and spread of COVID-19 to ensure that we can better prevent and prepare for future pandemics. The United Kingdom continues to support the World Health Organization in its ongoing expert study of the origins of COVID-19 and seeks a robust, transparent, and science-led review. This study remains open to testing all hypotheses that they deem reasonable. The Government has noted the Central Intelligence Agency’s assessment and will continually review our own assessment of the origins of the virus, considering any new intelligence. We will update the House of Commons and the House of Lords as and when there is anything new to say.
Asked by: Lord Kempsell (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, what steps they are taking to ensure that all signs, notices and other displays of expired COVID-19 restrictions and guidance are removed from public places by the relevant authorities.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
There are no COVID-19 restrictions in the United Kingdom. Whilst the UK Health Security Agency supports local authorities through the provision of public health guidance, the placement and removal of signs in public places is a matter for individual local authorities.
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will make an assessment of the potential merits of revising the Infection Prevention Controls guidance in the National Infection Prevention and Control Manual and Health Technical Memoranda guidelines prior to 1 March 2025 to ensure (a) recognition of the role of airborne transmission of SARS-Cov-2 and (b) appropriate guidance on (i) the use of FFP3 masks, (ii) improved standards of ventilation and air filter devices in (A) clinical and (B) non-clinical healthcare settings and (iii) other measures to limit airborne transmission of (1) Covid-19 and (2) other respiratory viruses; and if he will take steps to ensure the distribution of those guidelines to all employers and providers of healthcare workers.
Answered by Andrew Gwynne
The emerging evidence on airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses is continually reviewed by the UK Health Security Agency, NHS England, and the Department. Assessment of research on aerosol behaviour, Aerosol Generating Procedures (AGPs), and personal protective equipment, including FFP3 masks, ensures that the guidance reflects the latest science and best practice.
The National Infection Prevention and Control Manual offers practical guidance on respiratory transmission, including airborne pathways, with non-pathogen-specific standards providing a robust framework for diverse infection, prevention, and control challenges.
The updated acute respiratory virus guidance, published in March 2024, advises adult social care providers on precautions for preventing respiratory infection transmission, addressing masks, ventilation, and other measures based on current evidence. The acute respiratory virus guidance is available at the following link:
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
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 waiting until the publication of the final Module 3 Covid-19 Inquiry report to (a) recognise the role of airborne transmission of SARS-Cov-2 and (b) update (i) Infection Prevention Controls guidance in the National Infection Prevention and Control Manual and (ii) Health Technical Memoranda guidelines to limit airborne transmission of (A) Covid-19 and (B) other respiratory viruses on (1) health workers and (2) patients.
Answered by Andrew Gwynne
NHS England maintains efforts to evaluate potential revisions to the National Infection Prevention and Control Manual (NIPCM), which aim to maintain high infection, prevention, and control standards. Any updates will ensure consistent application across healthcare settings. Current guidance balances scientific evidence, operational feasibility, and sustainable infection, prevention, and control practices to protect healthcare workers and patients.
Delaying NIPCM updates until the final Module 3 COVID-19 inquiry report risks greater exposure to infection, slower practice improvements, and training gaps. Timely updates, based on emerging evidence, strengthen healthcare worker and patient safety through evidence-based, locally adapted measures.
The updated acute respiratory virus guidance, published in March 2024, advises adult social care providers on precautions for preventing respiratory infection transmission, addressing masks, ventilation, and other measures based on current evidence. The acute respiratory virus guidance is available at the following link:
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will make an assessment of the potential impact of Covid-19 lockdowns on trends in people’s quality-adjusted life years.
Answered by Andrew Gwynne
It is vital that we carefully consider all the impacts and lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic, both from the pandemic itself and the measures taken to address it. The intention of the lockdowns during COVID-19 was to save lives and protect the health of the population, and to protect the National Health Service, but it is also important to consider the other impacts on society and the public’s health.
During the pandemic, the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies commissioned and published a series of papers on the impact of the pandemic, including impacts on morbidity and mortality. These papers presented the net impacts of the pandemic and highlighted the difficulty in separating out the impact of infections, interventions, and voluntary changes in behaviour.
It isn’t possible for any assessment to retrospectively attribute impacts specifically to lockdowns, in part because we don’t know what would have happened without lockdowns in place.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, whether his Department has made an assessment of the (a) costs and (b) merits of each of the restrictions during the covid-19 pandemic.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The previous Government spent up to £400 billion on pandemic related interventions and programmes including 11.7 million employees that were furloughed through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, at a cost of £70 billion. 2.9m people on the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme received grants at a cost of £28bn.
The Chancellor has announced that she will appoint a Covid Corruption Commissioner, fulfilling a manifesto commitment. The main focus of the Commissioner will be pandemic PPE contracts. They will make sure everything that can be done, has been done, to get the public purse what it is owed.
The UK Covid-19 Inquiry has now been established. As set out in its Terms of Reference, the Inquiry will examine, consider and report on preparations and the response to the pandemic. In doing so, the inquiry will help identify lessons learned. The Inquiry published its Module 1 report, focussing on resilience and preparedness in July 2024. The government will carefully consider the Inquiry’s findings and recommendations, and will respond within six months.
Asked by: Rebecca Long Bailey (Labour - Salford)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if she will make an assessment of the potential (a) merits, (b) costs and (c) viability of establishing a financial compensation scheme for taxpayers who did not receive government financial support during the covid-19 pandemic.
Answered by Darren Jones - Minister for Intergovernmental Relations
The Government currently has no plans to assess or pursue such a financial compensation scheme.
HM Treasury provided an extensive package of support for individuals, businesses and public services throughout the pandemic, including an estimated £98 billion through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS) and the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme (SEISS). Together the schemes supported approximately 14.6 million employed and self-employed individuals, helping to protect jobs, businesses and livelihoods.
The previous Government provided support through the CJRS and SEISS based on two principles, a) targeting support at those who needed it most and b), guarding against error, fraud and abuse, whilst reaching as many individuals as possible. The SEISS paid out over £28 billion to nearly 3 million self-employed individuals and was one of the most generous schemes for the self-employed in the world. Those ineligible for the SEISS may have been eligible for other elements of financial support provided by the previous Government.