Tag: Andrew Gwynne

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-03-23.

To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, for what reason exemptions were granted from the sugar levy for 100 per cent fruit juice and milk; and if he will publish the evidence on which that decision was taken.

Mr David Gauke

Pure fruit juices and milk-based drinks have other health benefits and we do not want to discourage their consumption.

Pure fruit juices are part of the 5-a-day message and have intrinsic nutrients such as containing certain vitamins.

Milk and milk-products are a good source of protein and calcium, which have health benefits such as aiding bone formation. The government wants to encourage the consumption of milk to help children consume the required amounts of these nutrients.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-04-13.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether his Department has made an assessment of the number of NHS organisations that have official terms and conditions that set payment terms longer than 30 days.

George Freeman

The Department has developed standard National Health Service terms and conditions for use by NHS bodies procuring goods and services from commercial suppliers. The documents were first published in August 2013.

The Department has details of all activity on the gov.uk website which shows extensive use and downloads of the documents and has also invited regular feedback and online surveys that demonstrate the extensive use of the suite of documents.

In June 2015, the Department and the Cabinet Office Mystery Shopper scheme carried out spot checks with a number of trusts to find out the level of take up of the NHS terms and conditions. The results showed 90% of the trusts contacted confirmed they were using (or intended to use) the NHS terms and conditions.

The suite of documents has been endorsed by the Association of British Healthcare Industries (ABHI), the industry association for the medical technology sector, and the Health Care Supply Association, the representative and network organisation for NHS buyers. Both organisations inform the Department of any activity they are aware of that NHS bodies or suppliers are deviating from the stated terms and conditions. There have only limited examples to date.

The Department of Health has been made aware of a couple of examples of where NHS bodies were extending their payment terms beyond 30 days. The examples came both via the Cabinet Office mystery shopper scheme and ABHI. To support their members ABHI undertook more extensive research but has found these are isolated cases and the practice is not widespread.

The Department understands the concern and together with NHS Provider Regulators are working very closely with NHS providers to ensure that they have sufficient cash to support the safe delivery of their essential services. Although the NHS financial position is tight, the Department has not endorsed, and do not support, formal extensions of credit terms, particularly with Small and Medium size Enterprises, beyond the 30 days in statute.

The Department will also ask NHS Improvement to communicate with all NHS providers through its official monthly bulletin to raise awareness of the Better Practice Payment Code.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-05-18.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what account she will take of the loss of playing fields in consideration of applications for the disposal for development of the former Two Trees High School site in Denton.

Edward Timpson

The Education Act 2011 requires that the Secretary of State must give consent prior to the disposal of land which has been used for any school or academy in the last eight years. A key consideration for the government is whether the land proposed for disposal could be suitable for use by a new academy or free school.

School playing fields are also protected by Section 77 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998. Schools and local authorities must obtain the Secretary of State’s approval before they can dispose of their land. Applications to dispose of school playing fields are first considered by the school playing fields advisory panel, who make a recommendation to the Secretary of State, before she then makes her final decision.

At this time I am not aware of an application by Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council to seek approval to dispose of the former Two Trees Sports College, including the playing fields.

Should an application be submitted, the Secretary of State would take into account any groups or organisations with permission to use the playing fields and what suitable alternative provision they may have been offered. Local schools, which are deficient in playing field land, should also be offered the opportunity to use the playing field before any application is presented. She will also take into account local school place needs and any academy requirement.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-05-18.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate his Department has made of the prevalence of smoking among pregnant women.

Jane Ellison

In 2015, figures showed smoking prevalence rates in adults and 15 year olds in England to be at 18% and 8% respectively. The most recent quarterly information on prevalence of smoking among pregnant women, published in March, show this to be 10.6%.

Smoking prevalence is at its lowest ever level with official figures showing that the Government met each of the targets set out in its Tobacco Control Plan – Healthy Lives, Healthy People. A new Tobacco Control Plan is currently being developed.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Gwynne on 2016-05-26.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Public Health has seen the complaint by the Nordic Cochrane Centre to the European Medicines Agency regarding maladministration at that organisation; and if he will make a statement.

Jane Ellison

I am aware of the document from the Nordic Cochrane Centre. Whilst the issues raised are a matter for the European Medicines Agency (EMA), we are satisfied that the EMA has adequate processes in place to manage any potential conflicts of interest of its scientific experts and to uphold the integrity and impartiality of its decision-making. There was consensus agreement amongst EU Member States on the conclusions of the recent human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine safety review, and we have confidence in the outcome of this review.

Aside from the EMA review, the World Health Organization’s Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety advised in December 2015 that it had not found any safety issues to date that would alter its recommendation to use the vaccine. It concluded that there is no evidence that postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome are associated with HPV vaccination. Thorough reviews undertaken by the US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention and Health Canada have also concluded that available evidence does not support a link between HPV vaccine and development of serious and chronic illnesses.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment NHS England has made of the capacity in the NHS to meet the demand for aseptic services.

Jane Ellison

NHS England Specialist Pharmacy Services have to date not undertaken a comprehensive assessment of aseptic capacity to meet the future demands for chemotherapy provision in England. They are currently working closely with colleagues at the Department and NHS Improvement to support a number of regionally based reviews of aseptic capacity and to help trusts develop local and regional Hospital Pharmacy Transformation plans, as recommended by Lord Carter in February 2016.

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is an executive agency of the Department and is responsible for regulating unlicensed medicines under a Manufacturer’s ‘Specials’ Licence. The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) and Care Quality Commission (CQC) are responsible for regulating medicine prepared extemporaneously in a register pharmacy or hospital pharmacy respectively under the professional exemption.

MHRA will collaborate with the NHS, GPhC and CQC though inspections of MHRA licensed aseptic facilities or joint investigations of aseptic facilities in hospitals where there are patient safety concerns.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will make it his policy to ensure that (a) clinicians and (b) patients participate in the decision making process for the routine commissioning of procedures under the Commissioning through Evaluation Programme.

David Mowat

The policy development process for specialised commissioning 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.

In addition, clinical commissioning policies are already primarily developed through Clinical Reference Groups which comprise of a range of stakeholders including patients, carers and clinicians.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, when NICE last approved a breast cancer medicine for routine use on the NHS through the technology appraisal process.

Nicola Blackwood

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has confirmed that the last piece of technology appraisal guidance recommending a breast cancer drug was on gemcitabine for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (TA116), published in January 2007.

A number of drugs for the treatment of breast cancer have been made available through the Cancer Drugs Fund since it was established in 2010. The Fund has now helped 95,000 people in accessing life-extending cancer drugs that would not otherwise have been available to them.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many young offenders under the age of 18 have been admitted to a children’s mental health ward in each month since January 2014.

Dr Phillip Lee

We are committed to improving mental health treatment for young people in contact with the youth justice system. We are currently working with NHS England to develop a specific £24 million programme to address gaps in mental health provision for children and young people in contact with the justice system.

The information requested is as follows:

(1) Young offenders under the age of 18 (including those on remand) admitted to an adult mental health unit since January 2014

There was one such admission in November 2014.

(2) Young offenders under the age of 18 (including those on remand) admitted to a children’s or adolescent mental health unit since January 2014

The number of such admissions is set out in the table below:

Month of Admission	Number Admitted
January 2014	nil
February 2014	5
March 2014	5
April 2014	3
May 2014	1
June 2014	nil
July 2014	1
August 2014	nil
September 2014	2
October 2014	3
November 2014	1
December 2014	4

Month of Admission	Number Admitted
January 2015	2
February 2015	1
March 2015	1
April 2015	nil
May 2015	3
June 2015	4
July 2015	2
August 2015	1
September 2015	4
October 2015	2
November 2015	nil
December 2015	2

Month of Admission	Number Admitted
January 2016	nil
February 2016	nil
March 2016	1
April 2016	3
May 2016	3
June 2016	1
July 2016	2
August 2016	nil

Note 1 – the figures may represent individual offenders admitted more than once since January 2014.

Note 2 – these figures represent restricted patients only.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the implications for his Department’s policies of the recent National Evaluation of the Troubled Families Programme report.

Mr Marcus Jones

The National Institute of Economic and Social Research Impact Study was just one of 6 reports comprising the independent evaluation of the first Troubled Families Programme. The evaluation found that the programme had many positive achievements. These include:

• Families feeling more confident and optimistic about being able to cope in the future
• Joining up local services for families by encouraging a single keyworker approach to work with the whole family on all of its problems
• Raising the quality and capacity of local data systems
• Better joint working with partners such as Jobcentre Plus

The data shows that nearly 120,000 of the families on this programme saw their lives improve – more children attending school, youth crime and anti-social behaviour significantly cut and, in more than 18,000 families, an adult holding down a job. The evaluation does not dispute this fact.

Unsurprisingly, the ambitious and innovative impact study which used national administrative datasets to track changes in families circumstances over comparatively short time periods, was unable to specifically attribute positive outcomes achieved in employment, youth crime or school attendance to the Troubled Families Programme.

This was because at that time the level of change achieved was not significantly different from that seen in a group of families not on the programme with whom comparisons were made. This is not the same, however, as saying that the evaluation shows family outcomes did not improve, as some have wrongly inferred.

Of course, we will continue to review all evidence of how the programme is working, to learn from it and see if there’s more we can do to help families facing such multiple problems. In fact, we have already adapted the new programme in a number of ways, including extending the length of time over which family outcomes will be tracked – from 12 months to 5 years.