UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Edward Argar

  • Edward Argar – 2024 Speech on the Covid-19 Inquiry

    Edward Argar – 2024 Speech on the Covid-19 Inquiry

    The speech made by Edward Argar, the Conservative MP for Melton and Syston, in the House of Commons on 19 July 2024.

    I thank the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster not only for early sight of his statement, for which I am grateful, but for his tone in how he addressed what is an extremely sobering report—module 1 of nine. I suspect that we will look at many more such sobering reports in the coming months.

    I put on the record our gratitude to Lady Hallett and her team for the work that they have done and to all the witnesses who gave evidence, particularly those who had experienced loss and trauma. That evidence was vital, but giving it will not have been in any way easy, given what they had been through. I pay tribute to them. This module, the first of nine, is not only a hugely important piece of work, but the least this country owes to those who lost loved ones in the course of the pandemic.

    The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster rightly talked about how this country came together in the face of an unprecedented event, about which we learned more every day as the country had to adapt to changing knowledge. I join him in paying tribute to emergency workers and all across the country who worked in whatever way to come together and help the country get through, but particularly to those who worked in the NHS and care services and those who lost someone. It was an incredibly traumatic time for the entire country.

    What has been set out by the right hon. Gentleman today and by Lady Hallett yesterday is deeply sobering. It lays bare failures of the state in respect of planning, challenge, resourcing and leadership. Irrespective of Government or party in power, it is incumbent upon us all to consider it in the spirit in which Lady Hallett has put forward her recommendations.

    I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his recognition of the work already done since the pandemic to improve resilience in this country and ensure that we are better prepared for the next one. We started that work in government, having announced the largest overhaul of our resilience structures in decades. We created the resilience directorate within the Cabinet Office, breaking it out from day-to-day crisis management so that it could focus on resilience, horizon scanning and better preparedness. We set up the resilience academy to increase and improve the training of Ministers, MPs, civil servants and all those in civil society who respond to crises. We also announced a new national exercising programme to test our systems.

    The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster highlighted that the focus of previous pandemic preparedness planning was around influenza. It was seen in the context of Operation Cygnus, which was often pointed to as the blueprint of how to prepare for these things. The right hon. Gentleman was right that it focused on influenza, for which we have therapeutics; in the case of the covid pandemic, we did not. As a country and a civil society, we need to look completely across the piece at how we can best prepare for whatever eventuality may occur.

    In setting out his next steps, the right hon. Gentleman adopted exactly the right approach; I am grateful to him for that and for his candour. There will be many more lessons still to learn. It is incredibly important for our country, this Government and any future Government that we learn the lessons to ensure that we are ready for future pandemics, however painful those lessons are. I am also grateful for the right hon. Gentleman’s commitment to respond swiftly.

    I have a few questions for the right hon. Gentleman. What plans does he have to consult the devolved Administrations and local government structures on the detailed changes proposed to how they would operate in the context of a future emergency? What steps will he and the Government be taking to ensure that our emergency planning structures are more cohesively joined up if our country is to face another pandemic?

    More importantly, I want to conclude by saying that we stand ready to work constructively and openly with the right hon. Gentleman and the Government in the national interest to ensure that, as a country, we learn the lessons from this module and from Lady Hallett’s future recommendations to build better resilience in our country and ensure that, irrespective of who is in government, the country is better prepared in future. That is the least that all of us in the House owe the country and those who lost loved ones or suffered in so many different ways—those whose mental health suffered, the children who suffered from not being able to go to school, those who suffered from domestic abuse, and those up and down the country who in many ways still suffer from what happened back then.

    As I have said, I approach this issue in a spirit of co-operation with the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. I look forward to working with him in the national interest and to building resilience for the future.

    Pat McFadden

    I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his response and for the tone in which he spoke. He set out what the previous Government have done, and in my statement I acknowledged that progress has been made, but I think it is also right that a new Government take the opportunity to have a fresh look at this, with fresh eyes and in the right spirit.

    The right hon. Gentleman asked a couple of questions on consultation with the devolved Administrations. Yes, that is essential, as is consultation within England with local authorities and elected mayors. It is important that different parts of the country work together when there is a national emergency. There were also questions about how this operates within Government and the balance of responsibility between the centre and individual Government Departments. Baroness Hallett is quite clear that in a truly national emergency the centre has to step up and responsibility cannot be left to individual Departments.

    The right hon. Gentleman was right to conclude with the spirit of co-operation that we need on this issue. This work is in the national interest and in the public’s interest. It is the first duty of any Government of any political stripe to do what they can to protect the public. The challenge is that the risks we face are more complex and more unpredictable than they have been in the past. As I said in my statement, we cannot fully plan for every risk, but we have to try to have a system in place that gives us the best possible chance of planning for the risks we can see in front of us.

  • Edward Argar – 2024 Speech on Prison Capacity

    Edward Argar – 2024 Speech on Prison Capacity

    The speech made by Edward Argar, the Conservative MP for Melton and Syston, in the House of Commons on 18 July 2024.

    I am grateful to the Lord Chancellor for very timely advance sight of her statement. May I take this opportunity to congratulate her on her appointment, as well as the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones)? I congratulate the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice, the hon. Member for Swindon South (Heidi Alexander) on her return to this place. Notwithstanding the occasional tussle across the Dispatch Box, I look forward to working constructively with Lord Chancellor, and to holding her and the Government to account. She is of course a decent, courteous, and incredibly able person, and I wish her well in her role.

    We recognise the challenges and pressures facing the prison and criminal justice system, and the need to ensure that our prisons function effectively. Of course, the Government were well aware of those things when they were in opposition, as I know from challenging oral question sessions. In Government, we took the right decisions to significantly toughen up sentences for those who commit the worst crimes, in order to ensure that society was protected. To reflect that, we set in train the biggest prison building programme since the Victorian era. More than 13,000 additional prison places were delivered while we were in government. Two new prisons opened; one prison is under construction; there are two prisons with planning permission; and one prison is on the cusp of a decision. Labour’s planning permission proposal for prisons would not impact any of those developments. In that respect, it is simply a gimmick.

    Crucially, in the covid pandemic, supported by the then Opposition, we made the tough but correct decision not to mass-release prisoners as other countries did, and we maintained that bedrock of our justice system, trial by jury. Those correct decisions meant less space, and the number of people on remand waiting for trial or sentencing dramatically increasing from around 9,000 to 16,500, with resulting additional pressures.

    In deciding to reduce capacity pressure, the paramount consideration for the Lord Chancellor must always be public protection. With that in mind, although we will of course have to scrutinise the detail of her proposed sentence reduction scheme, I must say that we have significant public protection concerns about what she has announced so far, and I hope that she will be able to address those concerns today.

    The Lord Chancellor set out plans for limited exclusions relating to domestic abuse, but can she confirm that if a domestic abuser is convicted of, say, common assault, as is often the case, they would not be exempt from this policy? What exclusions does she plan to put in place to ensure that the worst, persistent, repeat offenders cannot benefit from this scheme? She set out that this was a temporary measure that will be reviewed after 18 months. What criteria will she set for its ending? Better still, will she commit to sunsetting the measure in the delegated legislation, and to returning to the House on this afresh in 18 months, if needed?

    What additional resources are being made available to probation? We hear what the Lord Chancellor says about getting 1,000 more trainee probation staff by March 2025, but how many of those will actually be new? How many will be additional to those whom we already planned to have in place through the existing trajectory for new trainees? Can she guarantee that no prisoners will benefit from her early release scheme without GPS tags and strict conditions? Indeed, will she mandate the imposition of GPS tracking? Can she confirm to the House progress on bringing HMP Dartmoor’s places back into use, and her long-term plans for HMP Dartmoor’s places? The previous Government committed £30 million to acquire land for building new prisons, and had already begun drawing up a site longlist. Is she expanding that fund, or merely re-announcing the same thing?

    More widely, the Lord Chancellor states that this is a temporary measure to ease pressure, so what are her long-term plans for meeting demand? Is she planning to scrap the tougher sentences for serious crimes that the Conservatives put in place to protect the public, and so to reverse our changes, or is she planning to build more prisons over and above the six that we committed to funding, to meet future demand? If it is the latter, has the Chancellor agreed the significant extra funding needed? Those are the long-term questions to which she and the Government owe this House and the public answers, given the changes that she is making today. I hope that she will be able to give clear answers.

    Shabana Mahmood

    I welcome the shadow Lord Chancellor to his place; we have always worked constructively together wherever appropriate, and I look forward to continuing to do so while he is in post. He made a heroic attempt to gloss over many years of failure in planning by the previous Government. I was surprised that he managed to say it all with a straight face. He knows full well that for many years the previous Government struggled to get such measures past many of their Back-Benchers, not all of whom have returned post the general election, but some of whom remain here, and remain implacable opponents of any kind of planning developments in their constituency. They think that national infrastructure is a good thing as long as it is elsewhere. I look forward to seeing whether there is a change of heart among those on the Opposition Benches. It would be welcome, because this Government will not allow the planning system to prevent our country from having either the prison places or the national infrastructure that we so desperately need. He also knows full well that of the 20,000 places that were supposed to have been provided by the previous Government by 2025, only 6,000 have been delivered.

    I am concerned about the position relating to prisoners on remand. The shadow Lord Chancellor rightly notes that the number of those on remand in our prison estate is around 16,000. Of course, judges need to be able to remand people to prison for public protection reasons. That will not change. He will know, given his former role in the Department, that there are no immediate solutions, because many of those individuals will in the end be sentenced to custody. I am considering all options available to me for driving that number down as much as possible. In the end, we will need our 10-year capacity plan to take account of what we expect the sentenced population to look like.

    On the sentences that are covered by this measure, the shadow Lord Chancellor will know that in order to make a change by means of a statutory instrument, it has to relate to specific offences. That is why we have taken every precaution and every option available to us to exclude sentences connected to domestic abuse. He knows that those will include—I am sure that he has seen the draft statutory instrument—offences related to the breaching of a non-molestation order; stalking, which I mentioned in my statement, including stalking involving the fear of violence, serious alarm or distress; strangulation or suffocation; controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship; the breaching of a restraining order; and a breach of a domestic abuse protection order. The common offences that we know are connected to domestic abuse are caught in the statutory instrument. On multiple and repeat offences, he will know that the decision relies on the combination that is reviewed when the sentencing calculation is done.

    As I said in my statement, I will return in 18 months to update the House. We want to remove this temporary measure as quickly as possible, and we will be transparent throughout. The shadow Lord Chancellor will not need to chase me around this building trying to find out what is happening, as I had to when I was in his position and we were considering the previous Government’s early release scheme. We will be transparent in a way that the previous Government simply were not. We will do a quarterly release of all the data, and we will update the House regularly.

    I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman followed the announcement on Friday closely, so he will know that the announcement on probation does not involve new money. It is a re-prioritisation of resources, because strengthening probation to make sure that it is in the strongest possible position to deal with the early release scheme is incredibly important to us.

    On Dartmoor, the right hon. Gentleman knows the history very well. Safety is our No. 1 priority, and after close monitoring of the situation at HMP Dartmoor, it has been decided that prison will be temporarily closed. I will update the House as the situation develops. I say to him gently that we have committed to a 10-year capacity strategy. We recognise that we need to make sure that this country has the prison places that it needs. We will deliver where the previous Government failed, and we will never allow the planning process to get in the way of having the prisons that we need in this country.

    Longer term, however, we will also look at driving down reoffending, because the entrenched cycle of reoffending creates more victims and more crime, and it has big impacts on our ability to have the capacity that we need in our prison estate. That is why this Government will make it a key priority to drive down reoffending. That is a strategy for creating better citizens, not better criminals. It is a strategy for cutting crime, and in the long term, it will deal with our capacity problems for years to come.

    Bambos Charalambous (Southgate and Wood Green) (Lab)

    I welcome my right hon. Friend to her place on the Government Front Bench. The imprisonment for public protection prison population is more than 2,700; 99% of those people are over tariff, and more than 700 prisoners are now 10 years over their original tariff. Can she accelerate the Ministry of Justice’s refreshed IPP action plan to help to reduce the prison population and right that wrong?

    Shabana Mahmood

    I thank my hon. Friend for that question. The situation with IPP prisoners is of great concern, and I know that huge numbers of Members on both sides of this House care about it deeply. I share that concern. IPP prisoners are not caught in the changes that we are putting forward; those are indeterminate sentences, not standard determinate sentences. We supported the previous Government in what we thought were sensible changes to the licence period and the action plan, and we will continue that work. However, any changes made have to account for public protection risks, first and foremost. We want to make progress with that cohort of prisoners, but not in a way that impacts public protection.

  • Edward Argar – 2023 Speech on the Firearms Bill

    Edward Argar – 2023 Speech on the Firearms Bill

    The speech made by Edward Argar, the Minister of State at the Ministry of Justice, in the House of Commons on 24 March 2023.

    I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Dr Mullan) for so ably stepping in for my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich West (Shaun Bailey), who has done so much work to bring forward this private Member’s Bill and to see it progress through the House. My hon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich did an admirable job of picking up the reins and deftly steering the Bill through Third Reading. This important and proportionate measure will help to advance safety while allowing legitimate activities to continue.

    As always, the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport (Luke Pollard), approaches the Bill in a pragmatic and sensible way. He highlighted the horrendous events in 2021 that saw the killing of five people in his constituency, and I pay tribute to him for the phenomenal support he gave to his affected constituents and to his community in the light of those horrific events.

    As the hon. Gentleman said, he will shortly be seeing the Policing Minister, on whose behalf I am responding today. In respect of the inquest findings following the horrific events in his constituency, I believe that the Policing Minister is committed to respond within 60 days, which according to my calculation brings us to mid-May. It is right for those findings to be considered carefully and properly, and, while I do not wish to pre-empt what the Minister will say, I know that he will indeed be considering them very carefully.

    I am happy to confirm that the Government support the Bill, which has been the subject of consensus across the House. It aims to address two vulnerabilities in the existing licensing controls, which have been debated in a commendably constructive way during its passage so far, here and in Committee. We committed ourselves to taking action following a public consultation on specific firearms safety issues that took place between 24 November 2020 and 16 February 2021.

    Clause 1 tightens the law relating to miniature rifle ranges by removing the exemption, provided by the Firearms Act 1968, that has allowed those operating such ranges to do so without the necessity of first obtaining a firearm certificate. Removing that exemption will mean that the operators will be subject to police checks ensuring that the ranges operate within a secure and safe framework, and that the firearms used there are stored securely. The Home Office will amend its guidance to reflect the fact that the operation of a miniature rifle range constitutes a good reason for possessing suitable firearms and ammunition, which I hope provides the reassurance sought by some Members on this point during earlier debates. The clause also means that the .22 rim-fire rifles used on miniature rifle ranges—a type of firearm that is already subject to licensing by police in other circumstances—will rightly be brought within the licensing regime for miniature rifle ranges. Furthermore, the term “miniature rifles” will be more tightly defined so that only the less powerful .22 rim-fire firearms may be used on miniature rifle ranges.

    Clause 2 tackles the unlawful manufacture of ammunition by introducing a new offence of possessing component parts with the intent to assemble unauthorised quantities of complete ammunition. The police had raised concerns that the component parts of ammunition were too easy to obtain, and were being used by criminals to manufacture whole rounds. I know there has been concern about the possibility that this is a back-door way of introducing controls on component parts, or that it will somehow prevent people from home loading their own ammunition. I hope it has been made sufficiently clear in our previous debates that someone with a valid certificate covering the complete rounds they possess will have nothing to fear, and that the measure is aimed at the criminals who seek to manufacture ammunition illegally. Concerns have also been raised—and were touched on by the shadow Minister—about clause 2 not extending to 3D printed ammunition. I hope it will reassure Members to know that such 3D printed items are subject to the law in the same way as any other firearm or ammunition. The fact that a 3D printer may have been used to make ammunition illegally could also be used in proving intent to a court.

    Both those measures received support in the public consultation that I mentioned earlier. It was widely acknowledged, by those representing shooting interests as well as those who wish to see tighter firearms controls more generally, that these changes would help to strengthen our firearms controls. The Bill will make a valuable contribution to firearms legislation while also ensuring that those who wish to continue to engage in firearms activities legitimately—whether that involves target shooting at clubs or activity centres, the legitimate home loading of ammunition, or other lawful activities—can continue to do so.

    Law enforcement agencies called on the Government to tighten the regulation in these areas and we have responded, but our work in keeping firearms law under review—another issue on which the shadow Minister sought assurances—and continuing to ensure that there are strong gun controls in this country does not stop here. A number of other issues that have rightly been raised during the Bill’s passage are out of scope, but the Government will continue to consider them closely in the context of the reports that have been received about the tragic shootings in various parts of the UK in recent months.

    Let me end by thanking, in absentia, my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich West for bringing the Bill to the House, and my hon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich and the shadow Minister for the tone in which, as ever, they have approached this issue. I also put on record my thanks to the Home Office officials who have worked with Ministers in responding to and working on this piece of legislation, and to officials in my own private office in the Ministry of Justice—one of my private secretaries is sitting in the box as we speak—for the speed with which, in recent hours, they have made sure I am fully briefed for this debate. I hope to see the Bill continue to progress through Parliament apace; I look forward to its having a smooth and swift passage through the other place and into law and I fully support what is proposed.

    Dr Mullan

    With the leave of the House, on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich West (Shaun Bailey), I would like to thank the Clerks, the members of the Bill Committee, House staff and all of those who have contributed to the Bill. My hon. Friend wanted me to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Clwyd South (Simon Baynes), and I want to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French) for his considered questions today. It has been a privilege to play a small role on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich West to bring this legislation through this stage in the House. I thank the whole House for its support.

    Question put and agreed to.

    Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed.

  • Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Edward Argar on 2016-05-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what weighting is given to bids made by British companies tendering for contracts from her Department for projects overseas.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    No additional weighting is given to bids made by British companies tendering for contracts for projects overseas.

    100% of DFID aid assistance is untied. British companies have proven to be very successful, winning over 85% of contracts awarded by DFID and also competing successfully for contracts from other international development agencies.

  • Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Edward Argar on 2016-05-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what proportion of her Department’s contracts for projects overseas were competitively tendered in each of the last three years.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    90% of contracts awarded during 2013-14, 86% of contracts awarded during 2014-15 and 94% of contracts awarded during 2015-16 were competitively tendered. During this time-frame there were a number of contracts which are not deemed as competitively tendered.

    Any programmes not competitively tendered are subject to Procurement management review.

  • Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Edward Argar on 2016-05-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department has taken to increase the effectiveness of the UK Border Force as a law enforcement organisation since it was established as an independent operational command within her Department in 2012.

    James Brokenshire

    Since it was established as an operational command of the Home Office in 2012, a number of positive changes have been made to Border Force’s working practices in order to make it a more effective law enforcement organisation. In 2012, Border Force was, for the first time, provided with an operating mandate which set out parameters for operational decision-making, including the need to maintain 100% checks on all passengers arriving at passport control at all times. Border Force has also become more intelligence-led – adept at utilising increasing volumes of advance data to make targeted interventions against potentially dangerous passengers and consignments of goods upon arrival in the UK.

    Other important changes include: an improvement in command and control arrangements so that Border Force can rapidly respond and adjust to evolving security threats across different locations; employing new leadership in headquarters and ports across the country to install a more security-focussed culture in the organisation and plan effective operations with partner organisations at both a national and international level. Border Force has also increased the capability of its officers to respond to security threats, by equipping all permanently employed staff working at passport control with powers and training to detain individuals that pose a threat to the public who are subject to an arrest warrant or otherwise liable to arrest.

    These reforms have had a transformative effect on Border Force. As well as undertaking its traditional immigration and customs roles more effectively and efficiently, it has also proved capable of meeting a range of new strategic priorities, including rapidly implementing a screening regime in response to the global ebola outbreak and being a international leader in its work to identify victims of trafficking and slavery. Furthermore, in the past year Border Force has seized nearly 8 tonnes of Class A Drugs, more than two and half times as much as in 2009/10.

  • Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Edward Argar on 2016-07-13.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what steps the Government is taking to support people with personal savings.

    Simon Kirby

    This Government has taken radical steps to support savers. From April 2017 the Lifetime ISA will mean People under 40 can use it to save for their first home and retirement and receive a 25% bonus from the Government. From the same date, all savers will also be able to benefit from the largest ever increase in the annual ISA allowance from £15,240 to £20,000 per year.

  • Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Edward Argar on 2016-09-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what plans the Government has to replicate the system of Historic Environment Records used in Wales in England.

    Tracey Crouch

    In England local planning authorities are required to have regard to the terms of the National Planning Policy Framework, which indicates that they should either maintain or have access to an Historical Environment Records (HER).

    The Heritage Information Access Strategy (HIAS) programme intends to secure an improved and more cost effective approach to handling digital historic environment data, especially that held by local authority Historic Environment Records. It is intended to improve the accessibility of that information and work with HERs to become more user focused. As part of HIAS Historic England will continue to champion the development, maintenance and implementation of standards for the creation, management and storage of digital historic environment data.

  • Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Edward Argar – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Edward Argar on 2016-09-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what recent assessment she has made of the humanitarian situation on the ground in Yemen.

    Rory Stewart

    Yemen is one of the most serious and complex humanitarian crises in the world. The United Nations (UN) estimates that 21.2 million people in Yemen require humanitarian assistance to meet their basic needs for food, water, sanitation, and healthcare, or protect their fundamental rights. Yemen is also experiencing an economic crisis, which has driven up food and other prices, and reduced people’s purchasing power.

    Ultimately, only an end to the conflict will address the humanitarian crisis. The UK is working closely with other countries to de-escalate the conflict and is providing significant support to UN-led peace talks. The UK is also working with the UN and other countries to improve commercial and humanitarian access to and within Yemen.

    The Secretary of State recently co-hosted an international event on Yemen to shine a spotlight on the humanitarian crisis. At the event, the UK announced a further £37 million, bringing our total humanitarian support for Yemen to £100 million for 2016/2017.

  • Edward Argar – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Edward Argar – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Edward Argar on 2015-11-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment his Department has made of the benefits of psychological support for (a) patients who have received and (b) the families of patients who have received a stem cell transplant.

    Jane Ellison

    The Government recognises the importance of supporting cancer survivors and is committed to working with the National Health Service, charities and patient groups to deliver the new Cancer Taskforce strategy.

    The report of the independent Cancer Taskforce, Achieving World-Class Cancer Outcomes: A Strategy for England 2015-2020 (July 2015), states that we need to transform our approach to support people living with and beyond cancer. The strategy notes that depression in cancer patients can be treated by medication and by psychological treatment. These treatments are most effectively and efficiently delivered using a systematic collaborative care model, such as Depression Care for People with Cancer. Cancer Taskforce strategy recommends accelerating the roll-out of the Recovery Package that includes a needs assessment that may lead to a patient being referred to support services that include psychological support. The Cancer Taskforce report says that the aim should be that by 2020 every person with cancer will have access to elements of the Recovery Package.

    We are working with the NHS, charities and patient groups to implement the independent Cancer Taskforce’s recommendations.