Author: admin

  • Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Efford on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what representations he has received from local health practitioners in Greenwich on the musculoskeletal service in Greenwich; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The procurement of local health services by means of competitive tendering is a matter for the local National Health Service.

    We are advised that NHS Greenwich Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) undertook a review of the provision of musculoskeletal (MSK) services in the area in 2014, involving local general practitioners (GPs), secondary care clinicians, other MSK clinicians and patient groups. The CCG took account of this exercise in confirming its commissioning intentions for an integrated MSK service pathway. The CCG subsequently held a GP clinical commissioner-led provider engagement event on 2 March 2016 to seek feedback on the clinical service specification and the proposed contractual model.

    We understand that, as part of the procurement process, the MSK Programme Board was fully apprised of the Our Healthier South East London initiative, the predecessor to the Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) in respect of elective orthopaedic centres.

    We are advised that the Invitation to Tender (ITT) developed as part of the procurement exercise explicitly stated the aspirations of these two initiatives, in addition to the proposed implementation timeline. When submitting their bids, all prospective providers were required to confirm their understanding and acceptance of the planned new model of in-patient care. Patient choice continues to apply with regard to both this local procurement and the South East London STP proposals on elective care centres.

    We understand that the ITT issued to potential service providers, was divided into sections, with each section allocated a weighting. The financial weighting was designed to ensure that the selection of the preferred provider was driven by clinical quality scores whilst remaining within the CCG’s published financial envelope. The detailed clinical service specification will be used to hold the provider to account within the format of the NHS national standard contract.

    Health Ministers have not received any representations from local health practitioners in Greenwich with regard to the provision of MSK services in the area.

  • Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Efford on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the role of Numis Securities is in the bidding process for the musculoskeletal service in Greenwich; what funding has been paid to that company relating to that role; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The procurement of local health services by means of competitive tendering is a matter for the local National Health Service.

    However, we are advised that NHS Greenwich Clinical Commissioning Group has not had any involvement with Numis Securities during the process leading to the recent award to Circle Health of the contract for the provision of musculoskeletal services in Greenwich.

  • Oliver Colvile – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Oliver Colvile – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Oliver Colvile on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what his Department is doing to narrow the 12 year difference in life expectancy between council wards in Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport constituency.

    Nicola Blackwood

    Addressing health inequalities is a Government priority. This was clearly set out in the Prime Minister’s inaugural speech in July. Key to this message was the importance of addressing the gap in life expectancy.

    Achieving measurable and sustained reductions in health inequalities by 2020 and reducing the gaps in life expectancy and healthy life expectancy are priority objectives in the Department’s Shared Delivery Plan: 2015 – 2020. Action is largely led locally to ensure that the solutions put in place reflect the needs of individual communities.

    To address the differences in life expectancy across Plymouth, Plymouth Clinical Commissioning Group and health services have introduced the ‘Thrive’ initiative. This aims to tackle the four lifestyle choices (inactivity, diet, alcohol consumption and smoking) that lead to respiratory diseases, cancer, stroke and heart disease. The work, currently in its second year, is the start of the long term drive to improve health and reduce inequalities in Plymouth. Health organisations such as Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Livewell Southwest and general practitioner Practices have signed up in support of the Thrive initiative.

    In order to ensure that health services are supporting those communities with the highest need, the ‘Success Regime’ has been introduced across Devon, which aims to protect and promote services for patients in local health and care systems that are struggling with financial or quality problems. Additionally, the Sustainability and Transformation Plan for Wider Devon includes a requirement to ensure that sustainable general practice is in place for all populations with equitable access times for routine and urgent treatment.

  • Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Efford on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how his Department consulted local GPs and other health providers during the tendering process for musculoskeletal services in Greenwich; how his Department assessed the implications of the outcome of that process for the services provided by those people; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The procurement of local health services by means of competitive tendering is a matter for the local National Health Service.

    We are advised that NHS Greenwich Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) undertook a review of the provision of musculoskeletal (MSK) services in the area in 2014, involving local general practitioners (GPs), secondary care clinicians, other MSK clinicians and patient groups. The CCG took account of this exercise in confirming its commissioning intentions for an integrated MSK service pathway. The CCG subsequently held a GP clinical commissioner-led provider engagement event on 2 March 2016 to seek feedback on the clinical service specification and the proposed contractual model.

    We understand that, as part of the procurement process, the MSK Programme Board was fully apprised of the Our Healthier South East London initiative, the predecessor to the Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) in respect of elective orthopaedic centres.

    We are advised that the Invitation to Tender (ITT) developed as part of the procurement exercise explicitly stated the aspirations of these two initiatives, in addition to the proposed implementation timeline. When submitting their bids, all prospective providers were required to confirm their understanding and acceptance of the planned new model of in-patient care. Patient choice continues to apply with regard to both this local procurement and the South East London STP proposals on elective care centres.

    We understand that the ITT issued to potential service providers, was divided into sections, with each section allocated a weighting. The financial weighting was designed to ensure that the selection of the preferred provider was driven by clinical quality scores whilst remaining within the CCG’s published financial envelope. The detailed clinical service specification will be used to hold the provider to account within the format of the NHS national standard contract.

    Health Ministers have not received any representations from local health practitioners in Greenwich with regard to the provision of MSK services in the area.

  • Karin Smyth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Karin Smyth – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Karin Smyth on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to increase GP recruitment in South Bristol.

    David Mowat

    The Government has committed to increasing the primary and community care workforce by 10,000 by 2020, including an additional 5,000 doctors in general practice.

    NHS England advises it has invested £10million to kick start a range of initiatives to expand the general practitioner (GP) workforce, set out in a joint action plan developed with Health Education England (HEE), Royal College of General Practiioners and British Medical Association. Achievements to date include , a new national induction and refreshers scheme was launched in 2015.

    Further measures to boost the general practice workforce are set out in the General Practice Forward View, published by NHS England on 21 April 2016.

    HEE’s confirms it is working to maintain a high fill rate of Bristol’s programme for Postgraduate Training pre Certificate of Completion of Training and to continue to produce high calibre GPs leaving the Bristol Programme upon completion of their training. HEE advises it is doing this by:-

    ― Continuing to offer high quality training placements throughout the Bristol region;

    ― Promoting new initiatives such as the Global Health Programme and Leadership and Excellence Extensions of Training opportunities; and,

    ― Maintaining existing Scholarship programme for trainees in their final year to gain extended skills in primary care.

  • Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Efford on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment his Department has made of the implications of Circle Holding plc being awarded the contract to provide musculoskeletal services in Greenwich for other services provided by Greenwich and Lewisham NHS Trust; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The procurement of local health services by means of competitive tendering is a matter for the local National Health Service.

    However, we are advised that NHS Greenwich Clinical Commissioning Group does not envisage that the recent award to Circle Health of the contract to provide musculoskeletal services will have any implications for other services provided by Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust.

  • Margaret Ritchie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Margaret Ritchie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Ritchie on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what recent discussions he has had with his counterparts in the devolved administrations on health and medical waiting lists; and what steps he is taking to reduce waiting lists.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    Health is a devolved matter, and there have been no discussions with counterparts in the devolved administrations about waiting lists for non-urgent conditions.

    The Government’s mandate to NHS England for 2016-17 includes the objective that NHS England should support the National Health Service to maintain, and where possible improve, performance against core waiting time standards in line with the NHS Constitution. NHS England and NHS Improvement continue to work together to support the NHS to maintain low waiting times for patients.

  • Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Efford on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many GP practices in Greenwich borough have vacancies for practice nurses; what the consequential cost savings were per practice in (a) 2015-16 and (b) the current financial year to date; and if he will make a statement.

    David Mowat

    The information requested is not centrally held.

  • Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Efford on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the average cost is to the NHS of each patient visit to a (a) GP, (b) GP surgery-based practice nurse and (c) practitioner led service at The Source, Greenwich; and if he will make a statement.

    David Mowat

    The information requested is not centrally held.

  • Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Clive Efford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Clive Efford on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assurances he has received from Greenwich Clinical Commissioning Group that the £12 million saving promised by Circle Holdings plc as part of its successful bid for the contract to provide musculoskeletal services will not affect the quality of services to patients; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    The procurement of local health services by means of competitive tendering is a matter for the local National Health Service.

    We are advised that NHS Greenwich Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) undertook a review of the provision of musculoskeletal (MSK) services in the area in 2014, involving local general practitioners (GPs), secondary care clinicians, other MSK clinicians and patient groups. The CCG took account of this exercise in confirming its commissioning intentions for an integrated MSK service pathway. The CCG subsequently held a GP clinical commissioner-led provider engagement event on 2 March 2016 to seek feedback on the clinical service specification and the proposed contractual model.

    We understand that, as part of the procurement process, the MSK Programme Board was fully apprised of the Our Healthier South East London initiative, the predecessor to the Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) in respect of elective orthopaedic centres.

    We are advised that the Invitation to Tender (ITT) developed as part of the procurement exercise explicitly stated the aspirations of these two initiatives, in addition to the proposed implementation timeline. When submitting their bids, all prospective providers were required to confirm their understanding and acceptance of the planned new model of in-patient care. Patient choice continues to apply with regard to both this local procurement and the South East London STP proposals on elective care centres.

    We understand that the ITT issued to potential service providers, was divided into sections, with each section allocated a weighting. The financial weighting was designed to ensure that the selection of the preferred provider was driven by clinical quality scores whilst remaining within the CCG’s published financial envelope. The detailed clinical service specification will be used to hold the provider to account within the format of the NHS national standard contract.

    Health Ministers have not received any representations from local health practitioners in Greenwich with regard to the provision of MSK services in the area.