Author: admin

  • Lord Grocott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Lord Grocott – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Grocott on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anelay of St Johns on 7 March (HL6442), whether they support the application to join the EU of (1) Turkey, (2) Macedonia, (3) Montenegro, (4) Albania, and (5) Serbia.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    We support all five countries’ aspiration to join the EU as an important means to drive reform. Turkey’s accession process remains the most effective mechanism to support continuing reform in Turkey. In the Western Balkans, the prospect of EU membership is helping to build stability and promote cooperation on issues that matter to the UK, including organised crime and illegal migration. The strict conditionality of the enlargement process means that it takes many years for a country to complete accession negotiations, undertake reforms and achieve the progress needed to meet EU membership criteria. Any decision to enlarge the EU requires the unanimous agreement of the governments of all existing Member States and ratification in accordance with each country’s constitutional arrangements. In the case of the UK, under the European Union Act 2011 ratification cannot take place without an Act of Parliament to approve the new accession. We can therefore ensure that our requirements are respected in any future EU enlargement. The UK will insist that controls on free movement cannot be lifted until accession countries’ economies have converged much more closely with existing Member States.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government why the South Warwickshire Clinical Commissioning Group is going ahead with its proposals to tender out its £227 million Out of Hospital Programme in the light of (1) the review of such contracts that is being conducted following the review by David Stout into the causes of the termination of the Uniting Care Partnership Contract, and (2) the criticism by the local acute Foundation Trust of that process.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS England advises that it is reviewing how this type of contract is assured. We understand that South Warwickshire Clinical Commissioning Group’s procurement has been placed on hold until the appropriate assurance is in place.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what changes they propose to make in the new contract for doctors in training in the light of the equality analysis undertaken under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The contract published on 31 March is a huge step forward for achieving fairness for all trainee doctors. For the first time junior doctors will be paid and rewarded solely on the basis of their own hard work and achievement and pay progression will be linked to level of training rather than arbitrarily to time served.

    All junior doctors should have the same terms and conditions – a level playing field – which is ultimately what employers and the British Medical Association (BMA) want and everyone deserves.

    When the Secretary of State published the Equality Analysis on the new contract for doctors and dentists in training in the NHS (“Doctors”) on the 31 March 2016 on the GOV.UK website he made it clear that, as a result of considering the Equality Analysis, in accordance with his duties and obligations, he had asked for a number of changes to the draft contract to address specific issues for certain groups with protected characteristics. This has been done and the contract has been duly amended. These changes included changes that benefited staff who work part time. The new contract is not discriminatory it ensures that all junior doctors receive equal pay for work of equal value. The BMA’s own lawyers have advised that nothing in the new contract is discriminatory. Nevertheless the equality duty is an ongoing duty and it is intended that monitoring will continue after the introduction of the new contract in accordance with the public sector equality duty in the Equality Act 2010.

    A copy of the Equality Analysis is attached.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what mitigating actions they propose to take with regards to the new contract for doctors in training in the light of the equality analysis undertaken under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 showing that certain features of that contract will have an adverse impact on those who work part-time, who are predominantly women.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The contract published on 31 March is a huge step forward for achieving fairness for all trainee doctors. For the first time junior doctors will be paid and rewarded solely on the basis of their own hard work and achievement and pay progression will be linked to level of training rather than arbitrarily to time served.

    All junior doctors should have the same terms and conditions – a level playing field – which is ultimately what employers and the British Medical Association (BMA) want and everyone deserves.

    When the Secretary of State published the Equality Analysis on the new contract for doctors and dentists in training in the NHS (“Doctors”) on the 31 March 2016 on the GOV.UK website he made it clear that, as a result of considering the Equality Analysis, in accordance with his duties and obligations, he had asked for a number of changes to the draft contract to address specific issues for certain groups with protected characteristics. This has been done and the contract has been duly amended. These changes included changes that benefited staff who work part time. The new contract is not discriminatory it ensures that all junior doctors receive equal pay for work of equal value. The BMA’s own lawyers have advised that nothing in the new contract is discriminatory. Nevertheless the equality duty is an ongoing duty and it is intended that monitoring will continue after the introduction of the new contract in accordance with the public sector equality duty in the Equality Act 2010.

    A copy of the Equality Analysis is attached.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what mitigating actions they propose to take in the light of the equality analysis undertaken under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 showing that certain features of the new contract for doctors in training will have an adverse impact on women who take maternity leave.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The contract published on 31 March is a huge step forward for achieving fairness for all trainee doctors. For the first time junior doctors will be paid and rewarded solely on the basis of their own hard work and achievement and pay progression will be linked to level of training rather than arbitrarily to time served.

    All junior doctors should have the same terms and conditions – a level playing field – which is ultimately what employers and the British Medical Association (BMA) want and everyone deserves.

    When the Secretary of State published the Equality Analysis on the new contract for doctors and dentists in training in the NHS (“Doctors”) on the 31 March 2016 on the GOV.UK website he made it clear that, as a result of considering the Equality Analysis, in accordance with his duties and obligations, he had asked for a number of changes to the draft contract to address specific issues for certain groups with protected characteristics. This has been done and the contract has been duly amended. These changes included changes that benefited staff who work part time. The new contract is not discriminatory it ensures that all junior doctors receive equal pay for work of equal value. The BMA’s own lawyers have advised that nothing in the new contract is discriminatory. Nevertheless the equality duty is an ongoing duty and it is intended that monitoring will continue after the introduction of the new contract in accordance with the public sector equality duty in the Equality Act 2010.

    A copy of the Equality Analysis is attached.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what mitigating actions they propose to take in the light of the equality analysis undertaken under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 showing that certain features of the new contract for doctors in training will have an adverse impact on carers, who are disproportionately women.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The contract published on 31 March is a huge step forward for achieving fairness for all trainee doctors. For the first time junior doctors will be paid and rewarded solely on the basis of their own hard work and achievement and pay progression will be linked to level of training rather than arbitrarily to time served.

    All junior doctors should have the same terms and conditions – a level playing field – which is ultimately what employers and the British Medical Association (BMA) want and everyone deserves.

    When the Secretary of State published the Equality Analysis on the new contract for doctors and dentists in training in the NHS (“Doctors”) on the 31 March 2016 on the GOV.UK website he made it clear that, as a result of considering the Equality Analysis, in accordance with his duties and obligations, he had asked for a number of changes to the draft contract to address specific issues for certain groups with protected characteristics. This has been done and the contract has been duly amended. These changes included changes that benefited staff who work part time. The new contract is not discriminatory it ensures that all junior doctors receive equal pay for work of equal value. The BMA’s own lawyers have advised that nothing in the new contract is discriminatory. Nevertheless the equality duty is an ongoing duty and it is intended that monitoring will continue after the introduction of the new contract in accordance with the public sector equality duty in the Equality Act 2010.

    A copy of the Equality Analysis is attached.

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they accept the recommendation of the report of the equality analysis undertaken under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 that a number of steps be taken to amend the draft new contract for doctors in training to address the position of part-time doctors in order to advance equality of opportunity between men and women doctors.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The contract published on 31 March is a huge step forward for achieving fairness for all trainee doctors. For the first time junior doctors will be paid and rewarded solely on the basis of their own hard work and achievement and pay progression will be linked to level of training rather than arbitrarily to time served.

    All junior doctors should have the same terms and conditions – a level playing field – which is ultimately what employers and the British Medical Association (BMA) want and everyone deserves.

    When the Secretary of State published the Equality Analysis on the new contract for doctors and dentists in training in the NHS (“Doctors”) on the 31 March 2016 on the GOV.UK website he made it clear that, as a result of considering the Equality Analysis, in accordance with his duties and obligations, he had asked for a number of changes to the draft contract to address specific issues for certain groups with protected characteristics. This has been done and the contract has been duly amended. These changes included changes that benefited staff who work part time. The new contract is not discriminatory it ensures that all junior doctors receive equal pay for work of equal value. The BMA’s own lawyers have advised that nothing in the new contract is discriminatory. Nevertheless the equality duty is an ongoing duty and it is intended that monitoring will continue after the introduction of the new contract in accordance with the public sector equality duty in the Equality Act 2010.

    A copy of the Equality Analysis is attached.

  • Lord Mancroft – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Mancroft – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mancroft on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government when NHS England expects to publish its operational framework for hepatitis C.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS England has already published its planning approach to implement National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommended treatment during 2016/17. NHS England has committed to produce an operational framework for hepatitis C during 2016/17. This will set out NHS England’s commitment to improving outcomes in hepatitis C across England. The publication date for the document has not been set but we anticipate work to continue during the late spring and early summer.

    NICE Technology Appraisals (TA) 363, 364 and 365 require Operational Delivery Networks to prioritise treatment for patients with the highest unmet clinical need. The National Health Service commitment to 10,000 treatments in 2016/17 reflects the multi-year modelling used by NICE and published in conjunction with the recommendations for TA 364. The NICE recommendations note that treatment decisions are influenced by clinical characteristics such as level of liver damage, genotype, treatment history and comorbidities. The recommendations also record the advice of clinical experts to the committee that a realistic estimate of patients accessing treatment each year is between 7-10,000.

  • Lord Mancroft – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Mancroft – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mancroft on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government which current policy document or guidance, if any, specified a five-year rollout for the prioritised treatment of hepatitis C patients.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS England has already published its planning approach to implement National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommended treatment during 2016/17. NHS England has committed to produce an operational framework for hepatitis C during 2016/17. This will set out NHS England’s commitment to improving outcomes in hepatitis C across England. The publication date for the document has not been set but we anticipate work to continue during the late spring and early summer.

    NICE Technology Appraisals (TA) 363, 364 and 365 require Operational Delivery Networks to prioritise treatment for patients with the highest unmet clinical need. The National Health Service commitment to 10,000 treatments in 2016/17 reflects the multi-year modelling used by NICE and published in conjunction with the recommendations for TA 364. The NICE recommendations note that treatment decisions are influenced by clinical characteristics such as level of liver damage, genotype, treatment history and comorbidities. The recommendations also record the advice of clinical experts to the committee that a realistic estimate of patients accessing treatment each year is between 7-10,000.

  • Lord Mancroft – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Mancroft – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mancroft on 2016-04-14.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what impact assessment they made of the introduction of CQUIN scheme BI1 Improving HCV Treatment Pathways through ODNs, and whether they will publish a copy of that assessment.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence specifically requires Operational Delivery Networks to prioritise hepatitis C patients on the basis of clinical need, as part of a progressive rollout of treatments over the next five years and the Commissioning for Quality and Innovation scheme (CQUIN) enables and ensures this take place. There is no separate assessment of impact. NHS England recognises that there is a very significant improvement in inequalities as a result of roll-out treatment for hepatitis C.