Asked by: Dan Carden (Labour - Liverpool, Walton)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, what assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of the report by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and the Johns Hopkins University entitled Crisis in Gaza: Scenario-Based Health Impact Projections, published on 19 February 2024.
Answered by Andrew Mitchell - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Minister for Development)
We are aware of this report.
As the Foreign Secretary has said, Palestinians civilians are facing a devastating and growing humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Too many civilians have been killed and we want to see Israel take greater care to limit its operations to military targets and avoid harming civilians and destroying homes.
The immediate priority must be a humanitarian pause in the fighting, which is the best route to get aid in and hostages out. We want that pause to lead to a sustainable ceasefire without a return to destruction, fighting and further loss of life. That remains the focus of all our diplomatic effort.
There is a desperate need for increased humanitarian support to Gaza and our focus must be on practical solutions that save lives. We trebled our aid commitment this financial year and we are doing everything we can to get more aid in and open more crossings. On 21 February, the UK and Jordan air-dropped life-saving aid to the Tal Al-Hawa hospital in northern Gaza. Four tonnes of vital supplies were provided, including medicines, fuel and food for hospital patients and staff.
Asked by: Mary Kelly Foy (Labour - City of Durham)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment she has made of the potential implications for her policies of waiting times for gynaecological care and treatment in (a) the North East and (b) England as of 21 February 2023.
Answered by Andrew Stephenson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Delivery Plan for Tackling the COVID-19 Backlog of Elective Care outlines how the National Health Service will bring down waiting times across all elective services. The plan does not prioritise specialties, but the NHS continues to focus on reducing the longest waits, providing high levels of support and scrutiny, targeted at the trusts which have the highest number of patients waiting the longest for elective treatment.
To support this plan and tackle waiting lists, including those in gynaecology, the Government plans to spend more than £8 billion from 2022/23 to 2024/25 to drive up and protect elective activity. We are also increasing capacity, including for gynaecological surgery, through our surgical hubs, delivered by the Getting It Right First Time ‘High Volume Low Complexity’ programme.
Asked by: Feryal Clark (Labour - Enfield North)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment she has made of the potential implications for her policies of NICE beginning a new phase of commercial negotiations in its multiple technology appraisal for treating cystic fibrosis.
Answered by Andrew Stephenson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government wants National Health Service patients to benefit from effective treatments, in a way that represents value, and is fair to all parties. The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) makes recommendations on whether medicines should be routinely funded by the NHS, based on an assessment of their costs and benefits. The NICE develops its recommendations independently based on an assessment of the available evidence, and through engagement with interested parties.
The NICE is currently developing guidance for the NHS on whether the disease modifying treatments Symkevi, Orkambi, and Kaftrio, which contains elexacaftor, tezacaftor and ivacaftor, should be routinely funded by the NHS. Following a recent consultation on its draft recommendations, the NICE has now reached a point in the process where it can pause guidance development to allow further commercial negotiations between NHS England and the company. An update on the anticipated date for the publication of final guidance will be provided by the NICE once timelines are confirmed.
NHS England has been able to reach commercial agreements with many companies for medicines being evaluated by the NICE, that have enabled the NICE to recommend them for NHS use.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether she is taking steps to promote collaboration between (a) the NHS, (b) community organisations and (c) health experts to tackle diabetes health inequalities.
Answered by Andrew Stephenson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The NHS Diabetes Programme (NDP) develops policies and provides leadership and support to integrated care boards (ICBs), to improve diabetes care and outcomes. The NDP routinely engages with people with firsthand experience of diabetes, sector stakeholders, and health experts in order to inform policy, and seeks input from a broad range of communities to support development of projects that aim to tackle variation and inequalities.
The NDP collaborates extensively with Diabetes UK, who conducts research with people who have lived experience of diabetes on behalf of the programme, for specific projects, and participates in the programme’s decision making at a board level. The NDP has also collaborated with Diabetes UK’s Tackling Inequality Commission, which engaged with communities, community organisations, and health experts. A report was released of the findings in November 2023.
The National Health Service statement on information on health inequalities sets out a description of the powers available to relevant NHS bodies to collect, analyse, and publish information, and the views of NHS England about how those powers should be exercised. The following diabetes metrics are included: the care process delivery, measuring variation between the percentage of people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes receiving all eight care processes, reported by deprivation and ethnicity; and the NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme, measuring variation between the percentage of NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme referrals from the most deprived quintile and the percentage of the type 2 diabetic population from the most deprived quintile.
ICBs and other NHS bodies will be required to include in their annual reports for 2023/24 and 2024/25, information that shows they have exercised their functions in accordance with the NHS legal statement. They will also need to publish reports on the information collected, how the data has been used to guide action, and summarise the inequalities it reveals.
The NDP ensures local health care systems, including those with rural communities, can benchmark and identify inequalities in diabetes care and outcomes through National Diabetes Audit data that contains demographic information such as age, deprivation, and ethnicity. Examples of the data can be found in the National Diabetes Audit Dashboards. The NDP also allocates funding to support the costs of diabetes clinical lead posts in local health systems, with a key priority of supporting improvement in addressing health inequalities at the local level.
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 assessment her Department has made of the potential merits of allowing NHS patients to seek a second opinion on their (a) condition and (b) treatment.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
The guidance Good Medical Practice, from the General Medical Council (GMC), sets out the standards of care and behaviour expected of all medical doctors practising in the United Kingdom. It states that doctors must recognise a patient’s right to choose whether to accept their advice, and respect a patient’s right to seek a second opinion. The GMC is an independent regulator and is responsible for operational matters, including any assessment of its policies and guidance. Managing second opinion requests is the responsibility of local National Health Service organisations.
On 21 February 2024, the Government announced that Martha’s Rule will be rolled out from April of this year, allowing at least 100 NHS trusts to introduce the rule during 2024/25, with the programme being evaluated throughout this year and next. This patient safety initiative will give NHS patients and families the right to obtain a rapid review outside of their immediate care team when a patient’s condition is thought to be deteriorating. The escalation process will be available around-the-clock to patients, families and NHS staff, and will be advertised throughout hospitals, making it quickly and easily accessible. Martha’s Rule will allow early intervention and rapid review, which may avoid harm to patients.
Asked by: Margaret Greenwood (Labour - Wirral West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if she will make an assessment of the potential implications for her policies of the RNID's findings in its report entitled Blocked Ears, Blocked Access: The crisis of NHS ear wax removal in England, published in January 2024.
Answered by Andrea Leadsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
In June 2018, there was an update to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s (NICE) guidance, which states that ear wax syringing is no longer recommended due to safety concerns. Instead, self-care methods including olive-oil drops and, if required, ear irrigation or micro-suctioning, are recommended.
The Government has no plans to include ear wax removal services in the national Standard General Medical Services Contract. Irrigation and micro-suctioning require a higher level of expertise and specialist equipment than syringing, which most general practices (GPs) do not have. This means that patients who were previously treated with syringing by their GPs may now require a referral to other National Health Service providers, to access irrigation or micro-suctioning services.
Local commissioners, including integrated care boards, are responsible for arranging services which will meet the recommendations on ear wax removal, as set out in the NICE guidance. This may involve commissioning GPs who agree to develop the required expertise to deliver these treatments or other providers, to whom GPs may refer patients, to provide ear wax removal services.
NHS England issued a communication to all commissioners in June 2022 which asked them to ensure that GPs, with whom they have agreed will not deliver ear irrigation or have not been commissioned to provide micro-suction services, are able to refer patients to appropriate local NHS services for ear wax removal, where symptoms persist following self-care methods. This includes arranging services in line with guidance on ear wax removal services, published by NICE. This guidance is available at the following link:
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng98/chapter/Recommendations#removing-earwax
The Department is not aware of any plans by NHS England to appoint a national clinical director or speciality advisor for ear wax removal services. Finally, the Department has noted the publication of the Royal National Institute for Deaf People’s (RNID) report Blocked Ears, Blocked Access with interest, and will meet with members of the RNID to discuss this report in due course.
Asked by: David Jones (Conservative - Clwyd West)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if she will make an assessment of the potential implications for her policies of the Tenth session of the Conference of the Parties to the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which concluded on 10 February 2024.
Answered by Andrea Leadsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Smoking is the number one entirely preventable cause of ill-health, disability and death in this country. It is responsible for 80,000 yearly deaths in the United Kingdom and one in four of all UK cancer deaths. It costs our country £17 billion a year, £14 billion of which is through lost productivity alone. It puts huge pressure on the National Health Service and social care, costing over £3 billion a year.
This is why the Government is committed to creating the first smokefree generation, ensuring no child born after 1 January 2009 will ever legally be sold tobacco. The tenth session of the Conference of the Parties (COP10) to the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control was an opportunity for the UK to showcase this international leadership on tobacco control. The decisions agreed at COP10 will not impact our smokefree generation policies or our plans to tackle youth vaping.
Asked by: Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party - Glasgow South West)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps his Department is taking to comply with principle (d) of schedule 1 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.
Answered by Paul Maynard - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
On joining DWP, all members of staff must complete a DSE assessment, which will highlight any special requirements specific to their role. Members of staff are then required to revisit this assessment every 3 years or at any time their circumstances change.
DWP endeavours to provide a contemporary and safe working environment, which meets the requirements of the Approved Documents (Building Regulations) in England and their equivalents in the devolved nations. We also follow the guiding principles of a variety of government specifications e.g. Publicly Available Specification 3000 for ‘Smart Working’ (PAS300), which recommends the use of a range of different work settings throughout a typical day to encourage movement, collaboration, and wellbeing. As well as the Government Property Agency’s Workplace Design Guidance.
The Department also has a Reasonable Adjustment Process for complex needs. This can include changes to the physical environment, alternative working patterns, or changes to work tasks.
Any changes to the way people are expected to work that might introduce significant new risk are identified and their impact considered against existing DWP health and safety policies and procedures.
DWP Health and Safety Impact Assessments are designed to give step by step support to programmes and projects who may introduce new risk. They provide a framework to help identify hazards and who might be harmed and enables DWP to record what needs to be done to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. It is mandatory for use by new programmes and projects with managers consulting with Trade Union representatives during the process.
Asked by: Paula Barker (Labour - Liverpool, Wavertree)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment his Department has made of the economic benefits of allowing asylum seekers to work if they have been waiting six months or more for an initial decision.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
Asylum seekers who have had their claim outstanding for 12 months or more, through no fault of their own, are allowed to work. Those permitted to work are restricted to jobs on the Shortage Occupation List. This is based on expert advice from the independent Migration Advisory Committee. It is the Home Office’s assessment that any analysis in this area is dependent on making assumptions from limited evidence and will therefore produce uncertain results.
Whilst we keep all policies under review, there are no immediate plans to change the existing policy, other than aligning it with the upcoming Immigration Salary List, which replaces the SOL. It is important that we distinguish between individuals who need protection and those seeking to work here who can apply for a work visa under the Immigration Rules. The Government has always been clear that asylum seekers do not need to make perilous journeys in order to seek employment in the UK. Those in need of protection should claim asylum in the first safe country they reach – that is the fastest route to safety.
Whilst there is mixed evidence that access to work in itself is a pull factor, it is reasonable to assume that this is one element in a range of factors that may drive illegal migration rather than use of legal routes to work in the UK. These routes include Skilled Worker, Global Talent, and Health and Care routes, which are supporting UK businesses to recruit workers with the skills and talent they need from around the world.
Asked by: Paul Blomfield (Labour - Sheffield Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether she has made an assessment of the potential implications for her policies of the report entitled Financial Sustainability of the UK Higher Education sector, published in January 2024.
Answered by Robert Halfon
This response assumes that the report referenced is PwC’s UK Higher Education (HE) Financial Sustainability Report, which was commissioned by Universities UK. Departmental officials have met with Universities UK to discuss the findings of this report.
The PwC report cites similar risks to those identified by the Office for Students (OfS), which is the independent regulator of HE in England responsible for monitoring the financial sustainability of registered HE providers. The latest report by the OfS on the financial health of the sector, which was published in May 2023, can be accessed at: https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/media/0b7d9daa-d6c7-477e-a0b2-b90985d0f935/financial-sustainability-report-2023-updated-june-2023.pdf
The department continues to work closely with the OfS, HE representative bodies and other government departments, as appropriate, to understand the financial sustainability of the sector.
In the aforementioned OfS report on the financial health of the HE sector, the OfS stated that the overall aggregate financial position of the sector is sound. However, there continues to be significant variation between individual providers, both across the sector and within peer groups.
The department consistently assesses the potential implications for any policies that could impact the HE sector, including financially, and particularly with respect to the interests of students.
It is important to note that HE providers are autonomous and, as such, it is for them to decide effective business models in order to adapt to financial risks. All HE providers should be stress testing their financial plans to ensure they are fit for purpose and that they do not rely on optimism around student recruitment.