Tag: Justin Madders

  • Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2016-06-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate his Department has made of the potential number of redundancies which will result from the decision to abolish the nursing, midwifery and allied health professions policy unit.

    Ben Gummer

    As part of the DH 2020 plan, the Department is making significant changes to the way it works. The Department’s approach is to flexibly access professional advice from a wide range of sources, including arm’s length bodies, regulators and professional bodies, rather than from a fixed standing team of internal advisers.

    These changes do not affect the role of the Chief Nursing Officer (CNO), who as CNO of the Department already advises, and will continue to advise all Ministers and the Department on the range of nursing issues.

    All staff in the Department, including staff in the current nursing, midwifery and allied health professions policy unit are eligible to apply for new roles in the organisation or to apply for a voluntary early severance scheme.

  • Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2016-09-05.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, from which sources does the Government receive credit card fees from people paying for services offered by its departments and agencies; and what the total amount received was in (a) 2013-14, (b) 2014-15 and (c) 2015-16.

    Ben Gummer

    The Cabinet Office does not collect data on behalf of Government on the receipt of credit card fees from people paying for services offered by its departments and agencies. If available, individual departments and agencies will hold this information.

  • Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2016-10-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the recommendation of the Independent Cancer Taskforce report, Achieving World-Class cancer outcomes: a strategy for England 2015-2020, published in July 2015, what progress has been made on developing the future shape and skill mix of the cancer workforce; and when he plans to publish a review into the cancer workforce.

    David Mowat

    Supported by Cancer Research UK and Macmillan Cancer Support, Health Education England (HEE) has been leading on the independent Cancer Taskforce recommendation that it should work with NHS England, charities and others to develop a vision for the future shape and skills mix of the workforce required to deliver a modern, holistic patient-centred cancer service.

    HEE has completed an initial cancer workforce baseline review that has been shared and discussed with key stakeholders, including the National Cancer Advisory Group, which has wide representation from cancer charities, medical Royal Colleges and others. The review is regularly updated with emerging intelligence from Sustainability and Transformation Plan areas on the workforce they require to deliver the cancer service challenge.

    In addition, HEE is leading on a major piece of work to address the workforce challenges in transforming cancer services, which includes a skills mix review. It has agreed an approach with key stakeholders for the review and will be working through Local Workforce Action Boards, Vanguards and Cancer Alliances, to understand the skills mix needed for emerging cancer service models. HEE will report back on this work in March 2017.

  • Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Justin Madders – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2016-10-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many pregnant women have been offered personal birth budgets since February 2016.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    Personal budgets for maternity services is one of the recommendations in Better Births, the report of the independent review of maternity services. Implementation of the review is being taken forward through the Maternity Transformation Board.

    NHS England is working with seven Maternity Choice and Personalisation Pioneers, encompassing 36 clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in total, to develop and test ways of improving choice in maternity services. The pioneer sites, each made up of clusters of CCGs, are working to widen choice across CCG boundaries and deepen choice by providing opportunities for new providers.

    The first stage of this is the development of Personal Maternity Care Budgets (PMCBs) as mechanisms to empower women to take control in choosing who provides their care. Unlike Personal Health Budgets, PMCBs do not offer the option of direct payments to women. They are intended instead to provide a visible, transparent and active mechanism for women to choose where they wish to receive their antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal care and will facilitate the flow of money between providers, depending on these choices.

    NHS England is working with pioneers on the design of PMCBs and the pioneers are also developing local implementation plans, including support tools for women, general practitioners, midwives and other relevant healthcare professions, to help women make meaningful choices, with the aim of rolling them out progressively in the seven Pioneer areas from November 2016. Their impact will be evaluated to inform the promotion and adoption of PMCBs across the country.

  • Justin Madders – 2022 Speech on Employment and the High Street

    Justin Madders – 2022 Speech on Employment and the High Street

    The speech made by Justin Madders, the Labour MP for Ellesmere Port and Neston, in Westminster Hall, the House of Commons, on 7 December 2022.

    It is an absolute pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mrs Cummins. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hornsey and Wood Green (Catherine West) on securing this really important debate.

    This debate is apposite, because only last week Barclays bank announced that it is going to close its branch in Ellesmere Port. What is particularly frustrating about that is that I was approached a couple of months ago by a constituent who told me that when they went into the branch they were discouraged from using the counter services. In fact, they were told that it was not available to personal customers and that there were other options available. Lo and behold, two months later Barclays bank says, “We don’t really have people coming into the branch any more, so we don’t need to keep it open.” I am afraid this drive to online services is being used by banks that can frankly afford to keep those branches open. It is part of a wider trend.

    We will now go through a 12-week consultation period that has been described as nothing more than a box-ticking exercise. I am pretty clear that Barclays is not going to change its mind. Has any bank ever decided to remain open after announcing its closure? The code of practice needs to be looked at seriously, because we are being treated as a box-ticking exercise. The wider impact of such decisions on our communities needs to be considered much more.

    It was 20 years ago that Barclays closed its branch in Little Sutton. It told us then, “It’s not a problem because you can still use the branch in Ellesmere Port.” Now my constituents will be sent further and further afield. HSBC announced that it would close its branch in Ellesmere Port back in March. It said, “You can go and use the branch in Bromborough, about five miles away,” but this week it announced that it is going to close the Bromborough branch. The cumulative effect is there for all to see. It seems that we are powerless to stop this trend, and our high streets are the worse for it.

    Some banks say that post offices can be used, but we are seeing closure after closure of post offices. In my constituency, two have announced their closure in the past couple of months. The Post Office’s flawed model means that they will reopen only if there is commercial partner. That means the great likelihood is the people of Great Sutton and Elton will not see those branches reopen. The people of Elton have already suffered: they had to wait more than a year for a commercial partner to be found the previous time their branch closed, and the people of Neston had the same problem. The Post Office needs to completely reappraise its responsibility to communities, instead of operating on a completely commercial basis.

    Barclays made £2 billion profit in the last quarter, so frankly it can afford to keep open every single branch that in recent weeks it announced would close. We need to draw a line in the sand. Will we continue to accept these closures? Will we continue to accept the decline of the high street? Or will we ask these organisations to take a bit more corporate responsibility for their areas, for the communities they are supposed to serve and for people who cannot go online for many understandable reasons?

    Councils are not able to offer a solution while they are restricted by ever-shrinking budget rounds and competitive bids that are not always successful. We need a sustainable, long-term strategy for our high streets that requires big anchor organisations, such as banks and post offices, to serve their communities. Without that, the civic pride that people feel in their high streets will continue to erode, and we will all be the poorer for that.

  • Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2015-10-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether on any occasion under-qualified pilots have been provided in the compulsory pilotage area at Londonderry Port.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Department does not hold this information.

  • Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2015-10-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of pilotage standards at Londonderry Port.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    Competent Harbour Authorities, such as the Londonderry Port & Harbour Commissioners, have a statutory duty to determine what pilotage services need to be provided to secure the safety of ships navigating their waters, and may authorise those persons they consider suitably qualified to act as pilots. The Department has no power to oversee or direct them in their execution of these duties.

  • Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2015-10-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what new performance target for Trusts and Foundation Trusts has been introduced since May 2010; and which new performance targets he plans to introduce for those bodies over the next five years.

    Jane Ellison

    A number of operational standards related to access and waiting times have been introduced or amended since May 2010. All the changes were based on recommendations from clinical experts.

    As part of our response to the Independent Cancer Taskforce’s report, we have announced our commitment that – by 2020 – 95% of National Health Service patients will be given a definitive cancer diagnosis or the all clear within 28 days of being referred by a general practitioner. This will be underpinned by investment – expected to be £300 million more in diagnostics a year by 2020.

    We are also introducing the first waiting times standards specifically for mental health so that, from April 2016:

    – 75% of people will be referred to the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies programme within six weeks, with 95% of people being referred within 18 weeks; and

    – 50% of people experiencing a first episode of psychosis will be treated within two weeks.

  • Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2015-10-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will make it his policy to maintain ringfencing for total NHS funding in the Autumn Statement.

    Alistair Burt

    The Government has protected the funding the National Health Service receives and increased the Department’s budget in real terms year on year. There is no plan to change this, fulfilling the Government’s manifesto commitment. By 2020-21, the Government will increase funding for the NHS by £10 billion a year in real terms compared to 2014-15 to support the implementation of the NHS’s own plan – the NHS Five Year Forward View – to transform services across the country.

  • Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Justin Madders – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Justin Madders on 2015-10-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the prevalence of the delays in state pension payments to British citizens living abroad.

    Justin Tomlinson

    Over 90% of International State Pension customer claims or change of circumstances are cleared within target. Those that are not cleared within these timescales reflect unavoidable delays that are a consequence of international postal services, additional work to ensure that evidence submitted is appropriate and robust and requirements to liaise with international authorities.