Tag: Debbie Abrahams

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Excess Deaths in 2022

    Debbie Abrahams – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Excess Deaths in 2022

    The parliamentary question asked by Debbie Abrahams, the Labour MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth, in the House of Commons on 24 January 2023.

    Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth) (Lab)

    What assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the number of excess deaths in 2022.

    Alex Cunningham (Stockton North) (Lab)

    What assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the number of excess deaths in 2022.

    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Maria Caulfield)

    Excess deaths data are published on the gov.uk website, which was most recently updated on 12 January. They show that causes of death from conditions such as ischemic heart disease contributed to excess deaths in England in the past year.

    Debbie Abrahams

    The UK’s all-cause mortality for working-age people was 8.3% above the average for the previous five years and the fifth highest in Europe. On top of that, excess deaths are disproportionately experienced by the most deprived and by people of African, Caribbean and Asian descent. Given that these figures are driven by structural inequalities, and that those inequalities are getting worse—the richest 1% have bagged nearly twice as much wealth as the remaining 99% in the past two years—does the Minister think that it is appropriate to recommend that people pay for their GPs?

    Maria Caulfield

    The Government are not recommending that people pay for their GPs. In fact, we are investing more in primary care than ever before, unlike the shadow Secretary of State who wants to dismantle the GP system and privatise the healthcare system as well. I think the hon. Lady needs to have a conversation with those on her own Front Bench. Not only did the shadow Secretary of State insult primary care teams for running up their vaccination programme, calling it “money for old rope”, but we are the ones who are investing in primary care services and making them more accessible to people.

    Alex Cunningham

    According to Cancer Research and Action on Smoking and Health, smoking costs the NHS in Stockton £9 million a year and social care £5 million a year, and it costs some £47 million in lost productivity, unemployment and premature deaths. Assuming that one day soon we will get the Government to back a control plan, will Ministers ensure that it includes the desperately needed funding for local smoking cessation services?

    Maria Caulfield

    Local decisions on public health are taken by local commissioning groups and local authorities, and it is for each local area to decide how it spends the money on public health.

    Esther McVey (Tatton) (Con)

    The chief medical officer recently warned that non-covid excess deaths are being driven in part by patients not getting statins or blood pressure medicines during the pandemic. However, when looking at the data on statins on OpenPrescribing.net, which is based on monthly NHS prescribing, there appears not to be a drop, so where is the evidence? If there is none, what is causing these excess deaths? Will the Minister commit to an urgent and thorough investigation on the matter?

    Maria Caulfield

    We are seeing an increase in excess deaths in this country, but we are also seeing that in Wales, in Scotland, in Northern Ireland and across Europe. There is a range of factors. As we saw, there was an increase in December in the number of people being admitted with flu, covid and other healthcare conditions. That was seen not just in this country, but across Europe.

    Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Ind)

    The Office for National Statistics has not issued mortality data by vaccination status since 31 May last year. Will the Minister confirm that her Department has collected that data for the rest of 2022 and inform the House when it will be published?

    Maria Caulfield

    I am happy to write to the hon. Gentleman with that information. However, I must be clear that we planned for an increase in admissions this winter. That is why we got on and delivered on our plans for 7,000 extra beds, and why we brought forward our flu and covid vaccination programme and lowered the age of eligibility. There are a number of factors, and they are the same factors that have driven excess deaths across the United Kingdom and across Europe.

    Mr Speaker

    I call the shadow Minister.

    Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab)

    There were 50,000 more deaths than we would otherwise have expected in 2022. Excluding the pandemic, that is the worst figure since 1951. The Health Secretary—part man, part ostrich—says he does not accept those figures, but as many as 500 people are dying every week waiting for essential care, and we are still getting the same old Tory denial and buck-passing. In her answer, will the Minister finally take some responsibility, accept the ONS excess deaths figure, and recognise the damage that she and her Government are doing to our NHS?

    Maria Caulfield

    I prefer to deal with facts rather than—[Interruption.] The BMJ has ranked the UK mid-table in Europe for mortality figures, which makes it comparable with Italy. In fact, Germany has higher excess deaths, at 15.6%, as do Finland, at 20.5%, and Poland, at 13.3%. However, if the hon. Gentleman wants to hear about what is happening in Labour-run Wales, the statistics available on the gov.wales website show that Wales, in December, had the highest number of red calls ever and that only 39.5% received a response within eight minutes—the lowest figure on record. Those are clinical reasons for excess deaths, not political ones. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman needs to recognise that fact.

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2023 Speech on a Code of Conduct for Elected Representatives

    Debbie Abrahams – 2023 Speech on a Code of Conduct for Elected Representatives

    The speech made by Debbie Abrahams, the Labour MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth, in the House of Commons on 10 January 2023.

    I beg to move,

    That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide for a statutory code of conduct for Ministers of the Crown; for a statutory code of conduct for Members of the House of Commons and members of the House of Lords; for a statutory code of conduct for councillors in England; and for connected purposes.

    Many, if not most of us, on all sides of this House became Members of Parliament because we wanted to help improve the lives of our constituents and all citizens across our great country and its nation states. As MPs, we have duties set out in our now updated codes of conduct, which also apply to Ministers and the Prime Minister. In addition to upholding the law and the general law about discrimination, these duties include:

    “to act in the interests of the nation as a whole”,

    with a “special duty” to our constituents; recognising the trust that has been placed on us as elected representatives; and to

    “always behave with probity and integrity,”

    including in our use of public resources. Within these duties we have the “General Principles of Conduct”, often referred to as the Nolan principles, which apply to all aspects of our parliamentary and public life: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. But, as we know, too often over the last few years we have seen a small minority of Members pay scant regard to these duties and principles, even wilfully ignoring them.

    The scandals of the last few years are not the issue of just one Administration. The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, who is responsible for regulating the Members’ code, was initially set up in 1995 to investigate the cash-for-questions affair, and there have been other scandals since then. These have usually resulted in changes to the Members and ministerial codes, as well as the business appointment rules which regulate the so-called “revolving door” employment between the public and private sector of former Ministers and senior officials.

    The impact of these abuses cannot be underestimated. It may be a tiny minority who bend or break the rules, but we all become tarred by the same brush, corrupted by association. According to polling by Compassion in Politics, four in five people have no respect for politicians and 40% of parents would be concerned if their child expressed a desire to become a politician. Office for National Statistics data shows that only one in three people trust the Government and two in three think politicians are only out for themselves. Let us pause for a moment to consider what that tells us about the health of our democracy and the prospects for democratic engagement in Britain today and in the future.

    Many hon. Members will have experienced at first hand the extreme effects of the steady disintegration in our social fabric. Too many voters have become apathetic; some have become actively hostile. Hate, intolerance and violence are all products of the escalating distrust and increasing disdain with which the public view the political class. Part of how we restore confidence in politics and politicians is by actively demonstrating that all elected representatives will abide by the rules and principles set out in our codes of conduct.

    I want to acknowledge the role and work of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards and their office in regulating the Members’ code. I also recognise the work of right hon., hon. and noble colleagues on the Committee on Standards, the Committee on Privileges, the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee and the Committee on Standards in Public Life. I also pay tribute to their lay members. Those Committees’ recent reports and recommendations for changes to strengthen the various codes of conduct will, I believe, help in that regard. However, there is a need for much more significant reform in the accountability systems that regulate Parliament’s conduct. The current systems are spider’s webs, built up over the past 400 years or so, which interact and overlap. Inevitably, there are still issues.

    My Bill cannot deal with everything that is needed for a whole-system reform, but it could tackle the most serious and urgent issues, the first and most egregious of which is the Prime Minister’s remaining the arbiter of the ministerial code. The terms of reference for the new so-called independent adviser to the Prime Minister on Ministers’ interests, appointed on 22 December last year, have not changed since the previous adviser under the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Boris Johnson). They still fail to give independence and autonomy to initiate new investigations into breaches of the ministerial code or to publish the findings of any investigations. That has to change.

    My Bill proposes that, as in Northern Ireland, the ministerial code, including the seven Nolan principles, are put in statute, and that an independent commissioner on ministerial standards is established as a statutory office. His or her role would be: to advise the Prime Minister on all aspects of the ministerial code; to undertake investigations, both independently and referred, into potential breaches of the code; to appoint a panel of parliamentarians and lay members to take part in such investigations; to publish the findings of such investigations; and to make recommendations regarding sanctions for any breaches. He or she would also have the power to make a statement on ethical matters of general public interest affecting Ministers.

    The second issue is how Members of Parliament are held to account outside of election time. The October 2022 code of conduct procedure set out what the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards can and cannot do to hold MPs to account on potential breaches of the code. It defines other regulatory systems that hold Members to account—for example, expenses are for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, and conduct in the Chamber is obviously the domain of Mr Speaker—but paragraph 17 expressly prohibits the Commissioner from investigating allegations solely about breaches of the seven principles of public life. Although it has been argued that that is because principles are not judiciable, for me, there is a gap. My Bill proposes that the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards should also become a statutory office and that, under their purview, in addition to investigating Members for potential breaches of code of conduct rules, Members could be investigated for serious and serial breaches of the seven principles of public life.

    Thirdly, I turn to the important role that our local councillors play in our communities and in our democracy as a whole. Again, the vast majority of councillors work tirelessly at trying to make a difference in their communities, but unfortunately a minority use their positions for their own purposes and threaten our democracy as a result. Although there is a requirement for councillors to have a councillor code of conduct under the Localism Act 2011, such codes vary greatly between different local authorities. My Bill proposes a standardised statutory councillor code of conduct, which includes the Nolan principles and is accompanied by a statutory accountability system.

    Finally, we need to review how our parliamentary system, and the elective representatives within it, are regulated in a way that reflects the modern, inclusive, empowering democracy that we want to become in the 21st century and beyond. Polling by Compassion in Politics found that 76% of people believe that they should have the right to influence our codes of conduct. As such, my Bill proposes that an independent ethics commission of constitutional legal experts is established by Parliament to advise on system reforms. The ethics commission would also work with a citizen’s assembly to come up with final recommendations to Parliament.

    As co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for compassionate politics, I have argued for the need to reform the culture of our politics. The Prime Minister and other Ministers and Members have talked about the need for compassion in politics. Good policies can come only from good politics. That must start with the conduct of those in high office. As such, I hope that the Government will support my Bill.

    Finally, I extend my thanks to Matt Hawkins from Compassion in Politics, George Hulme in my office and Jolyon Maugham of the Good Law Project. I commend the Bill to the House.

    Question put and agreed to.

    Ordered,

    That Debbie Abrahams, Kim Leadbeater, Caroline Lucas, Layla Moran and Dr Dan Poulter present the Bill.

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Debbie Abrahams – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Debbie Abrahams on 2015-11-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what information is recorded for primary and secondary breast cancer by the Cancer Registry on (a) diagnosis dates, (b) stage at diagnosis, (c) age and (d) gender of person at diagnosis.

    Jane Ellison

    Public Health England (PHE) is responsible for collecting cancer data to support national cancer registration in England and recognises the importance of collecting data on recurrent breast cancer; however data on the number of people diagnosed with secondary breast cancer is not currently available. Pilot work undertaken in April 2012 in acute trusts has improved the reporting for breast cancer recurrence and metastasis to the National Cancer Registration Service (NCRS). In order to drive up data completeness for the submissions to the NCRS, monthly reports on data quality and completeness of the Cancer Outcomes and Services Dataset are made available to all acute providers.

    Since the completion of the pilot project the NCRS in PHE has been working with all acute National Health Service providers in England to improve the reporting of breast cancer recurrence. The collection of this particular item of data remains challenging because relapsed patients may represent in many different ways and through many referral routes.

    Further work is being scoped by NHS England and PHE based on the recommendation in the recent Independent Cancer Taskforce report to establish robust surveillance systems to collect this data on all cancers.

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Debbie Abrahams – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Debbie Abrahams on 2015-12-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, if he will commission research on the proportion of public and private service providers which offer access to their services through video relay.

    Mr Edward Vaizey

    Annual correspondence with the FTSE 100 companieshas indicated that from 2013 to present there has been a steady increase in the number of companies that provide video relay. With regards to public sector, DWP plan to launch a pilot service by the end of the year.

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Debbie Abrahams on 2016-02-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will commission an evaluation of the effectiveness of support for former Independent Living Fund recipients.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The Government has committed to conducting research on the impact of the Fund’s closure and has already identified a sample of former users who have agreed to participate.

    The Government believes that local authorities are best placed to provide for the care needs of people in their local community. The Care Act 2014 introduced stringent minimum standards for this care and it is within this context that local authorities took over responsibility for the care and support of former Independent Living Fund users from 1st July 2015.

    The Government has fully-funded local authorities to meet their additional obligations to service users previously in receipt of the Independent Living Fund for the remainder of the 2015/16 financial year and there will continue to be a separate grant to support them for 2016-17. Under proposals currently being consulted on, the Government will also enable local authorities to continue to fully fund the care packages of former Independent Living Fund users for the remainder of the parliament.

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Debbie Abrahams on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many personal independence payment (PIP) claimants in each (a) parliamentary constituency and (b) local authority area will be affected by his Department’s proposed changes to aids and appliances points; and what the average reduction in PIP payment per person will be.

    Justin Tomlinson

    As confirmed by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State in his statement to the House on 21 March, the proposed changes to PIP will not be going ahead.

    We spend around £50bn every year on benefits alone to support people with disabilities or health conditions, with spending on Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and Disability Living Allowance (DLA) having increased by more than £3 billion since 2010. The government is committed to talking to disabled people, their representatives, healthcare professionals and employers to ensure the welfare system works better with the health and social care systems and provides help and support to those who need it most.

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Debbie Abrahams on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many care leavers as identified through the self-identified marker used by his Department between the ages of 18 and 25 had their (a) jobseeker’s allowance and (b) employment and support allowance sanctioned in 2013-14 and 2014-15.

    Priti Patel

    The information requested in respect of care leavers is not readily available and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Debbie Abrahams on 2016-05-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how his Department monitors the progress of organisations providing NHS or adult social care towards conforming to the Accessible Information Standard.

    Alistair Burt

    NHS England published the Accessible Information Standard in July 2015. Compliance with the Standard is a legal duty and organisations that provide National Health Service care or adult social care are required to implement the Standard in full by 31 July 2016. Compliance with the Standard is also a requirement of the NHS Standard Contract 2016/17.

    NHS England does not hold information on how many NHS trusts conform to the Standard.

    NHS England is not proactively monitoring progress of organisations that provide NHS or adult social care towards conforming to the Accessible Information Standard, as the Standard does not establish a new national audit or dataset which requires organisations to report centrally on their adherence. In addition, NHS England as an organisation does not have a monitoring or inspection remit.

    However, the Standard includes requirements for organisations to publish or display an accessible communications policy which explains how they will follow the Accessible Information Standard, and an accessible complaints policy. The inclusion of these requirements is intended to support ease of compliance assessment by interested organisations, and to ensure that people with information and communication support needs are able to provide feedback to organisations about their experiences.

    The specification for the Standard also makes clear that commissioning organisations must actively support compliance by organisations from which they commission services and must also seek assurance from providers in this regard.

    In addition, the Care Quality Commission will look at evidence of how services implement the Accessible Information Standard as part of their inspection of health services and adult social care services when they make judgements about whether health services are responsive to people’s needs, and adult social care services are responsive to people’s needs and whether they are well led.

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Debbie Abrahams – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Debbie Abrahams on 2016-07-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps his Department plans to take in response to the Report of the Transparency Taskforce, published in May 2016, on the costs and hidden fees associated with investments and pensions.

    Richard Harrington

    The Government remains committed to increasing transparency and ensuring that members of pension schemes are able to obtain information about the costs and charges which they bear.

    Governance bodies of defined contribution workplace pension schemes are obliged, under existing requirements, to assess costs and charges. We and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) are actively considering how to achieve greater transparency and standardisation of transaction costs, and the FCA plans to publish a consultation later this year.

  • Debbie Abrahams – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Debbie Abrahams – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Debbie Abrahams on 2015-11-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what research his Department has conducted into the likelihood of people who get primary breast cancer twice getting secondary breast cancer.

    George Freeman

    The Department does not itself conduct research, and has not funded research on this specific topic.