The below Parliamentary question was asked by Derek Twigg on 2016-03-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many agency nurses were employed by each hospital trust in Merseyside and Cheshire in each year since 2010.
Ben Gummer
The Department does not collect this data centrally.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Joan Ryan on 2016-03-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether his Department has made an assessment of the proportion of GPs on the executive bodies of clinical commissioning groups who have a financial interest in the services they are commissioning.
George Freeman
The National Audit Office recently estimated that in 2014-15 there were 3,150 governing body members in total across the clinical commissioning group (CCG) sector. Of these, 1,300 (41%) were also general practitioners, who make decisions about local health services and may potentially be paid by their CCG for providing these services. It is expected that all CCGs should follow the published guidance on managing conflicts of interest.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Edward Argar on 2016-03-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the timetable is for the publication of the findings of the Accelerated Access Review.
George Freeman
Sir Hugh Taylor published his interim report to the review on 27 October 2015. The review will conclude with Sir Hugh’s final recommendations to Government which are expected in spring 2016.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Flello on 2016-03-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether he has had discussions with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority after its authorisation of a licence for gene editing of human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 on the process of ethical approval being granted for such a licence.
George Freeman
The Department has not had any discussions with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) after its authorisation of a licence for gene editing of human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 about the process of ethical approval being granted for such a licence.
The Francis Crick Institute, which made the licence application to the HFEA, is intending to place copies of the information given to patients or donors explaining this research on its website, once the final draft has been agreed.
There is no statutory requirement for ethical approval to be in place before an HFEA research licence can be granted. However, the HFEA has developed guidance for its licensing committee that such approval should be in place before a licence is granted and research is allowed to proceed.
In 2012, none of the three licences granted had ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on each licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place. In 2013, five research licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2014, seven licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2015, one of the 15 licences granted did not have ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on the licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Flello on 2016-03-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will take steps to ensure that information given to patients or donors explaining research to which they have consented on genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 will be publicly available.
George Freeman
The Department has not had any discussions with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) after its authorisation of a licence for gene editing of human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 about the process of ethical approval being granted for such a licence.
The Francis Crick Institute, which made the licence application to the HFEA, is intending to place copies of the information given to patients or donors explaining this research on its website, once the final draft has been agreed.
There is no statutory requirement for ethical approval to be in place before an HFEA research licence can be granted. However, the HFEA has developed guidance for its licensing committee that such approval should be in place before a licence is granted and research is allowed to proceed.
In 2012, none of the three licences granted had ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on each licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place. In 2013, five research licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2014, seven licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2015, one of the 15 licences granted did not have ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on the licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Robert Flello on 2016-03-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the guidance is on licences applied for to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority being granted before receiving ethical approval; and what proportion of such licences have been so granted in each of the last three years.
George Freeman
The Department has not had any discussions with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) after its authorisation of a licence for gene editing of human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 about the process of ethical approval being granted for such a licence.
The Francis Crick Institute, which made the licence application to the HFEA, is intending to place copies of the information given to patients or donors explaining this research on its website, once the final draft has been agreed.
There is no statutory requirement for ethical approval to be in place before an HFEA research licence can be granted. However, the HFEA has developed guidance for its licensing committee that such approval should be in place before a licence is granted and research is allowed to proceed.
In 2012, none of the three licences granted had ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on each licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place. In 2013, five research licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2014, seven licences were granted, all of which had ethical approval in place. In 2015, one of the 15 licences granted did not have ethical approval in place and a condition was therefore placed on the licence that licensed research could not proceed until such approval was in place.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Goodman on 2016-03-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many (a) nurses, (b) doctors and (c) allied health professionals practised overseas after qualifying from a UK institution in (i) 2013-14 and (ii) 2014-15; and how many of those professionals (i) hold British passports and (ii) were classified as overseas students when studying in the UK.
Ben Gummer
The information is not held by the Department.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Catherine McKinnell on 2016-03-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the Answer of 21 September 2015 to Question HL2285, what progress Public Health England has made on making the Systemic Anticancer Therapy dataset publicly available; what the timetable is for that dataset being fully accessible; and whether he plans that the dataset will be used to collect data on patient outcomes for treatment funded through the new Cancer Drugs Fund.
George Freeman
Public Health England (PHE) is working to making data collected as part of the Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy (SACT) dataset available through its Office for Data Release function by summer 2016. The absolute priority of PHE is to maintain patient confidentiality and therefore data will only be released to external parties in a format that does not compromise patient confidentiality either directly or by inference.
NHS England is currently working closely with PHE on a proposition which will enable the SACT dataset to be used to collect data on patient outcomes for treatment funded through the new Cancer Drugs Fund.
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is working closely with NHS England to support the new way of working for the Cancer Drugs Fund from 1 April 2016 and the NICE Technology Appraisal process and methods will be considered by the NICE Board at their next meeting on 16 March 2016. We do not have any information on whether the dataset used by PHE will be used to collect data on patient outcomes for treatment funded through the new Cancer Drugs Fund.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2016-03-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 1 December 2015 to Question 17278, what progress Public Health England has made on investigating the use of Office for National Statistics data on drug-related deaths to assess the impact of increased naloxone availability; and if he will make a statement.
Jane Ellison
In October 2015 Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency changed medicines regulations to widen the availability of naloxone. Public Health England provided advice on local implementation.
Drug poisioning deaths – which include drug misuse deaths – are published annually by the Office for National Statistics. These statistics are for deaths registered in each year.
Since there are often delays in registering drug-related deaths, it is likely to be some time before we can meaningfully assess what impact the wider availability of naloxone has made on the numbers of drug related deaths.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julian Knight on 2016-03-02.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many legacy continuing health care cases are more than two years old and have payments outstanding (a) in England, (b) in the West Midlands and (c) at Birmingham Cross City Clinical Commissioning Group.
Alistair Burt
At the end of March 2013, the National Health Service had received approximately 59,000 requests to assess previously unassessed periods of care for NHS Continuing Healthcare eligibility.
NHS England collects information on the number of these cases which are awaiting a decision on eligibility.
As at 31 January 2016:
(a) There were 15,716 requests to assess previously unassessed periods of care in England;
(b) there were 848 requests to assess previously unassessed periods of care in the West Midlands; and
(c) there were 260 requests to assess previously unassessed periods of care in Birmingham Cross City Clinical Commissioning Group.
It is not possible to assess how many of these individuals may be entitled to redress payments until a full assessment of eligibility for NHS Continuing Healthcare is undertaken, in line with the principles and processes set out in the National Framework for NHS Continuing Healthcare and NHS-funded Nursing Care (November 2012) (revised).