Tag: Andrew Gwynne

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2015-11-24.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the (a) forecast reduction in cases of and deaths from infection by influenza as a result of the nasal flu vaccine in 2015, (b) forecast number of nasal flu vaccines administered and (c) cost of delivering that programme in each of the next three years.

Jane Ellison

It is difficult to forecast the population impact that the nasal flu vaccine will have in the forthcoming season as vaccine effectiveness will vary according to the circulating influenza virus in any one season together with the vaccine uptake achieved. In general the effectiveness of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) ranges from 50% upwards against illness caused by antigenically matched strains in children, but has also shown some protection against antigenically mismatched strains. The provisional uptake in two, three and four year olds in England up to week 46 2015 (ending 15 November 2015) was 23.0%, 24.0% and 19.4% respectively.

In 2016/17 the childhood flu programme will cover all 2-7 year olds and at risk children.

In 2017/18 the childhood flu programme will cover all 2-10 year olds and at risk children.

Table 1: The forecast number of nasal flu vaccines administered to children in each of the next three years.

Year	Forecast number of doses of nasal flu vaccine administered to children
2016/17	2.8 million
2017/18	4.3 million
2018/19	4.3 million

Source: NHS England’s Spending Review submission for childhood flu.

Table 2: The forecast cost of delivering the childhood flu programme in each of the next three years.

Year	Estimated cost of delivering the childhood flu programme
2016/17	£80 million
2017/18	£120 million
2018/19	£120 million

Note: These are the full programme costs (including the cost of the vaccine).

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-04.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if his Department will make representations to NHS England on its decision to delay the implementation of the positive national commissioning policy on microprocessor-controlled knees.

Alistair Burt

The commissioning of prosthetics is the responsibility of NHS England as a specialised service. The rehabilitation and re-ablement of patients is provided at a local level by specialised Multi-Disciplinary Teams which should be consultant led. The NHS Standard Contract for Complex Disability Equipment – Prosthetics, sets out how the specialist centres should operate and the required level of prosthetic services to be delivered.

A revised policy proposal for the routine commissioning of microprocessor controlled knees was considered by NHS England’s expert Clinical Priorities Advisory Group which recommended its adoption for routine commissioning. The proposal was then considered by NHS England’s Specialised Commissioning Oversight Group at its meeting on 9 December where it was agreed that NHS England would support this service development as a possible call on its resources. However given the potential scale of investment and the need to consider its priority relative to other treatments which would also have a possible call on the specialised commissioning resources, it was decided that the policy should go forward for consideration as part of NHS England’s next annual prioritisation round in June 2016.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-14.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 6 January 2016 to Question 20580, if his Department will ask NHS England to allow patient access to technologies assessed through NHS England’s Commissioning through Evaluation programme during the analysis phase on the same basis as during the first stage of the programme.

George Freeman

Whilst any patients already treated under a Commissioning through Evaluation (CtE) scheme will continue to receive appropriate follow up care, no new patients will be funded by NHS England during the subsequent analysis phase.

This ensures that, during the analysis phase, NHS England continues its current policy of not funding treatments which have insufficient evidence of clinical and / or cost effectiveness.

In turn, this means that NHS England can direct public funds to evidence based care. It also allows CtE programme funding to be redirected to support patient recruitment in another area of specialised care where further evaluation data is needed.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-27.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what plans he has for call-in and scrutiny arrangements for the work of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority.

James Wharton

I refer the hon. member to my answer of 19 January, PQ 921796 and would add that the Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill received Royal Assent on 28 January.

The provisions of that Act, including those on overview and scrutiny, are now in force for the purposes of making secondary legislation and for all other purposes will come into force two months after Royal Assent. My rt. hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Greg Clark) intends to exercise his powers to make further provision about the membership and operation of overview and scrutiny committees as soon as practicable.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-28.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many full-time staff have been employed at the Rare and Imported Pathogens Laboratory in each of the last five years.

Jane Ellison

The Rare and Imported Pathogens Laboratory (RIPL) staff numbers for the last five years are listed below:

Staff employed by RIPL in each of the last five years

Year	Technical and Admin Staff	Medical Staff
2011	9	2
2012	11	3
2013	13	3.5
2014	14	3.5
2015	15	3.5

Note: Since 2013, RIPL was incorporated into the functions of Public Health England.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what role the UK pharmaceutical industry is playing in the development of a vaccine for the Zika virus.

Jane Ellison

The United Kingdom pharmaceutical industry will play a leading role in the development of a vaccine for the Zika virus, in collaboration with a range of the UK’s infectious disease experts, who are world leaders in this area.

In the Spending Review, the £1 billion Ross Fund, run jointly by the Department of Health and Department for International Development, includes over £350 million for the development of new vaccines, drugs and diagnostics for infectious diseases.

Particularly noteworthy within this, the UK Vaccine Network, with up to £120 million of funding, brings together industry, academia and Government to finance the development of new vaccines for priority infectious diseases with epidemic potential, including Zika. Indeed, the Network will launch a major funding call to finance the development of vaccines for Zika and other priority diseases at the end of February.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-03.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 3 February 2016 to Question 24211, what account she takes of the recreational benefit of maintaining school playing fields when considering a school disposal request.

Edward Timpson

The Education Funding Agency and the Independent School Playing Fields Panel who advise on playing field disposals will look at a range of factors before advising the Secretary of State on disposals, including any reduction in access to playing fields for the school, other local schools and the local community.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-10.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether he expects residents adjoining the M60 in Denton to qualify for monetary compensation for the extension of the smart motorway scheme.

Andrew Jones

The M60 Smart Motorway Project near Denton is currently in its early design stage and the scope and boundaries of the project are still being defined. By its nature of this type of project, Highways England expect that the scheme will mostly be within the existing footprint.

Any compensation arrangements will be the same as for all such improvement schemes. If there is a requirement to purchase land then the owners of that land can expect to be appropriately compensated. Similarly if properties in the area of the scheme qualify for noise insulation under the Noise Insulation Regulations, then appropriate offers will be made.

The environmental impact will be assessed as part of the design and any necessary actions will be considered during the detailed design. One year after the completion of the scheme local property owners may apply for compensation under Part I of the Land Compensation Act 1973 and such claims will be assessed under the terms of that Act.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-02-24.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what proportion of the £570 million referred to in paragraph 0.5 of his Department’s paper, Infected blood: reform of financial and other support, published in January 2016, will be spent in each year of the programme; what the average spend per recipient will be in each such year; and in what categories of spending that funding will fall in each such year.

Jane Ellison

The Department estimates that it would pay out £570 million over the next 45 years, based on the existing unreformed scheme. The Department currently anticipates that it will disburse the same sum under a reformed scheme plus the additional £125 million over the current spending review period of five years. We are currently consulting on the reformed scheme and are unable to estimate the future average annual spend beyond the current spending review or the categories of spend for the period. For the current spending review period the planned expenditure is £47.5 million for each of the next five years.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-03-08.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, with reference to the letter to the hon. Member for Denton and Reddish from the Minister for Local Growth and the Northern Powerhouse of 18 February 2016, on accountability of combined authorities, what his policy is on the appointment of hon. Members from the constituent districts to the scrutiny, overview and audit panels of combined authorities.

James Wharton

The scrutiny requirements for combined authorities are set out in Schedule 5A to the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009, as inserted by the Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016, which provide that overview and scrutiny committees of combined authorities have powers to call in decisions and to involve other persons in their work. Schedule 5A also provides for secondary legislation which must ensure that the majority of members of an overview and scrutiny committee will be members of the combined authority’s constituent councils and that at least one member of an audit committee is an independent person. The scrutiny requirements of the Local Government Act 2000 do not apply to combined authorities.