Tag: Andrew Gwynne

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-05-24.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the timetable is for implementing HPV vaccinations at sexual health clinics for men who have sex with men.

Jane Ellison

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), the expert body that advises the Government on all immunisation matters, advised that a targeted human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme should be undertaken for men who have sex with men (MSM) up to 45 years of age who attend genitourinary medicine and HIV clinics. They noted that this should be subject to procurement of the vaccine and delivery of the programme at a cost-effective price. JCVI acknowledged that finding a way to implement its advice would be challenging and made clear that work was needed by the Department and others to consider commissioning and delivery routes for this programme.

The Department announced on 26 May 2016 that an HPV vaccination pilot for MSM would start in June.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-06-08.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate NHS England has made of the projected savings from the introduction of dose banding of chemotherapy drugs without affecting quality of care.

George Freeman

NHS England has advised that the dose banding initiative forms part of its Specialised Commissioning Improving Value programme and can be considered as an expansion of current practice and direction of travel. The dose banding scheme has been primarily designed to deliver improvements in safety and quality of care.

NHS England advises that the scheme does also have the potential to deliver efficiencies for hospitals and its initial estimate is that this could release up to £5 million of value to the health system.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-07-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how long his Department estimates the Commissioning through Evaluation analysis phase will last for (a) selective dorsal rhizotomy, (b) patent foramen ovale closure, (c) left atrial appendage closure, (d) percutaneous mitral valve leaflet repair, (e) selective internal radiation therapy and (f) stereotactic ablative radiotherapy.

David Mowat

Commissioning through Evaluation (CtE) is an innovative £25 million programme introduced by NHS England in 2013. It specifically aims to generate valuable new evaluation data in promising areas of specialised care where the current evidence base of cost and clinical effectiveness is insufficient to support routine National Health Service commissioning, and where further formal research trials are thought to be less likely.

Each scheme – put forward by senior clinicians and other stakeholders – is funded on a time limited basis in a small number of selected centres, and then evaluated by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

Once the planned number of patients has been recruited across the participating centres, each scheme closes to new patients and analysis begins. This means that the funding identified for each scheme can then be reinvested into the evaluation of additional potentially life changing specialised treatments to maximise the value and impact of the overall evaluation fund for patients. As an example, routinely funding Selective Dorsal Rhizotomy contrary to the currently published clinical commissioning policy and in advance of a formal review of any new evidence would mean that between £2 million and £4 million per year (covering the surgical costs and immediate follow up only) would then be unavailable to support the evaluation of other promising treatments.

The analysis phase for each CtE scheme will typically take between one and two years depending on how long we need to follow up patients after their treatment to identify its effectiveness. The three cardiology based CtE schemes are currently scheduled for a 15 month analysis and reporting phase, after which the data can be used by NHS England to support policy review.

However, CtE is only one form of data that might be put forward in considering a new (or revision to an existing) policy and clinicians do not need to await the final report from CtE schemes if they feel that other new substantive data becomes available more quickly.

NHS England’s published clinical commissioning policies (which set out eligibility for NHS funded specialised care on the basis of the available evidence) can be reviewed at any time where there is thought to be substantive new evidence available, and around 100 such proposals were developed and considered by NHS England during 2016/17.

The policy development process is subject to both informal stakeholder testing and formal public consultation, including the opportunity for patients, clinicians and industry representatives to review and comment on the evidence base considered and the assessed impact on patients, existing services and cost.

Where a new service is routinely commissioned as a result of a policy review, NHS England works with commissioned providers to ensure that sufficient clinical expertise and supporting infrastructure is in place to provide a safe service to patients in line with nationally set requirements.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-09-14.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, with reference to article 3 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea’s classification for the breadth of the territorial seas not exceeding 12 nautical miles, for what reason Gibraltar has a three nautical mile limit on its territorial waters.

Sir Alan Duncan

​The 1987 Territorial Sea Act extended UK waters up to the 12 nautical miles maximum permitted by Article 3 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Laws of the Sea (UNCLOS). However, the provisions of this Act were not extended to the British Overseas Territories, so the United Kingdom’s claim to territorial waters remains up to 3 nautical miles from Gibraltar. Where the extent of territorial waters is less than 3 nautical miles, this is due to the proximity of the Spanish coastline and a determined median line. We retain the option to extend the reach of British Gibraltar Territorial Waters to the maximum extent of 12 nautical miles permitted under UNCLOS and keep this option under review. The United Kingdom is the only State entitled to a territorial claim over the 3-12 nautical mile zone in respect of Gibraltar.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-10-11.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many instances were recorded in which a young person was restrained physically by placing their face on the floor in a children’s mental health ward in each year from 2012.

Nicola Blackwood

Prone restraint data for years since 2012 is not available. NHS Digital began collecting the number of incidents of prone restraint on mental health wards for adults and for children and young people in January 2016. In line with the UK Statistics Authority’s Code of Practice, this data is undergoing evaluation.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-10-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how many families in (a) England, (b) Greater Manchester, (c) Tameside and (d) Stockport have been identified as challenging and are subject to persistent visits under the Troubled Families programme.

Mr Marcus Jones

In Stockport, the local authority achieved outcomes with 565 families in the first Troubled Families Programme; in Tameside with 620 families; in Greater Manchester with 8,090 families. Across England local authorities achieved outcomes overall with 116,654 families. We expected that local authorities would work with more families than they claimed results for in order to achieve their targets.

In the new programme, Greater Manchester, including Stockport and Tameside, is delivering the programme as a whole. Greater Manchester has engaged 13,228 families in the new programme so far; across England, 164,481 families have been engaged.

The programme promoted but did not mandate a whole family intervention approach. It was not appropriate to do so: all local authorities are different, and the problems faced by each local authority and each family are different. The intensity of the intervention, and the number of visits made by key workers to each family, was dependent on the particular needs of each family and the approach agreed by the family and the key worker.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2015-11-02.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what estimate she has made of the value of stationery that has been (a) lost and (b) stolen from her Department in each of the last five fiscal years; and what the cost was of replacing such stationery.

Andrea Leadsom

The Department has made no estimate on the value of any stationery (a) lost or (b) stolen in any of the last five fiscal years.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2015-11-23.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how the findings of its Innovation, Health and Wealth report, published in December 2011, were taken into account in the terms of reference of the Accelerated Access Review.

George Freeman

The Accelerated Access Review (AAR), chaired by Sir Hugh Taylor, will make recommendations to government on reforms to accelerate access for National Health Service patients to innovative medicines and medical technologies making our country the best place in the world to design, develop and deploy these products. The terms of the reference for the review focus on faster access to innovations, which may include certain off-patent repurposed drugs, as opposed to the routine availability of medicines or medical technologies.

Prior to establishing the terms of reference for the AAR, the Department reviewed evaluation reports and met with officials from previous initiatives on the uptake of innovation in the NHS including the Innovation, Health and Wealth report. As a result, building upon the lessons of previous reviews is explicit with the terms of reference of the AAR.

The AAR has regular meetings with senior officials from NHS England via a steering group as recommendations are being developed. In addition, some staff from NHS England have been assigned to support the review team.

Sir Hugh is still in the process of developing final recommendations which will be published in spring 2016. In his Interim Report published in October, Sir Hugh sets out a proposition on “galvanising the NHS”. This involves supporting the NHS to adopt innovation, more rapidly through better practical support, stronger incentives and the potential streamlining of local structures.

The Department reviewed evaluation reports and met with officials from previous initiatives on the uptake of innovation in the NHS prior to establishing the terms of reference for the AAR. It was clear that whilst progress has been made on the uptake of innovation in the NHS there is still much to do. Sir Hugh and the head of the External Advisory Group, Professor Sir John Bell, set out the case for uptake of innovation in the recently published AAR Interim Report.

The AAR has senior level contact with officials working on Lord Carter’s review of NHS efficiency to ensure that information is shared between the two teams.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2015-12-09.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how much his Department and each of its agencies and non-departmental public bodies plans to spend on (a) Christmas cards, (b) postage of Christmas cards, (c) Christmas parties and (d) Christmas decorations and trees in 2015.

Jane Ellison

A search of the Department’s Business Management System database for 2015 has identified there is no planned spend to fund Christmas cards, postage of Christmas cards and parties. As separately identified from our facilities management suppliers, EMCOR, the Department has no plans currently to purchase Christmas decorations or trees from them.

The Civil Service Code sets out the principles and standards of behaviour expected of civil servants, including their fiduciary obligation to make sure public money and other resources are used properly and efficiently. Public money is not used by the Department, Public Health England or the Medicine and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency to fund occasions such as internal social gatherings or office parties. Any social events are funded by the staff themselves.

Arm’s length bodies have systems in place to ensure public funds are used appropriately and standards of propriety are met, in line with their responsibilities as public bodies

Spend as requested from all the Departments non-departmental public bodies and its agencies are separately reported below:

NHS England have confirmed they hold no planned expenditure for all these categories.

Monitor have confirmed they hold no planned expenditure for all these categories.

The Care Quality Commission have confirmed they hold no planned expenditure for all these categories.

Public Health England have confirmed they hold no planned expenditure for all these categories.

Health Education England have confirmed they hold no planned expenditure for all these categories.

The Health and Social Care Information Centre have confirmed they hold no planned expenditure for all these categories.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence 2015 expenditure is contained in the table below.

	£
Christmas cards	0
Postage	0
Parties	£1615.32
Decorations and trees	0
Total	£1615.32

Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency 2015 expenditure is contained in the table below.

	£
Christmas cards	£0.00
Postage	£0.00
Parties	£0.00
Decorations and trees	£630+£126 VAT
Total	£756

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority have confirmed they hold no planned expenditure for all these categories.

The Human Tissue Authority have confirmed they hold no planned expenditure for all these categories.

The Health Research Authority have confirmed they hold no planned expenditure for all these categories.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-01-12.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the level of aseptic pharmaceutical medication error within the NHS.

George Freeman

Neither the Department nor NHS England has made any such assessment.