Tag: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-03-10.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch will be responsible for overseeing the National Reporting and Learning System.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch will not be responsible for overseeing the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS). The national safety functions, including the responsibility for overseeing the NRLS, will be transferring to NHS Improvement from 1 April 2016. The Government announced this decision in July 2015.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-04-13.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the additional costs to the NHS of (1) Care Quality Commission fee increases, (2) the cost of pension changes announced in the budget as a result of re-evaluation, and (3) the decision of NHS Property Services to charge market rates for the use of NHS buildings, in each financial year from 2016–17 to 2020–21.

Lord Prior of Brampton

Government policy requires the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to move towards fully recovering the chargeable costs of regulating health and adult social care in England. The amounts that the CQC charges to providers differ depending on the cost of regulation in each sector and how close they are currently to full cost recovery.

Following the Government’s Spending Review, the CQC recommended a two-year trajectory to reach full cost recovery, taking into account the level of grant-in-aid available to the organisation for 2016/17 to enable the CQC to fulfil its statutory functions. The Secretary of State consented to the CQC’s proposals. The Secretary of State also announced that the Government will make available extra funding for general practice to reflect a number of increasing cost pressures, of which increased CQC fees are a part.

The Government estimates the total impact of the change in the discount rate will be an overall increase in the cost of employer contributions across the major public service pension schemes of £2 billion a year. Until the results of the next valuation of the NHS Pension Scheme, which commenced this year, are known we will not know the total impact on employer contribution rates, including the change to the discount rate announced in the Budget 2016. We expect to have the results of the current valuation by Budget 2018; the results of this valuation will set the cost employers pay from 2019/20.

In regards to NHS Property Services’ charges to the National Health Service, overall, these will increase by in the region of £60 million, though the impact on individual occupiers will vary. Some increasing, and some not increasing. The Department has agreed with NHS England to meet any net increase in costs at a national level and NHS England will allocate funding to clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) to ensure all cost changes are fully mitigated in 2016/17. General Practitioners will receive adjustments for rental changes through the normal reimbursement arrangements. Arrangements in relation to funding adjustments for 2017/18 and beyond will be considered in conjunction with NHS England and NHS Improvement and we anticipated will be communicated by the end of the first quarter of 2016/17.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-04-19.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what evidence the Department of Health has on the effectiveness of the existing NHS Whistleblowing Helpline.

Lord Prior of Brampton

We are committed to improving openness in the National Health Service and ensuring whistleblowers receive proper support. Every NHS trust will have a ‘Freedom to Speak up Guardian’ who will support whistleblowers and foster an open and honest culture. The National Guardian will lead, advise, and support the local guardians in carrying out investigations on how concerns are being handled, share good practice, report on national or common themes, and identify any barriers that are preventing the NHS from having a truly safe and open culture.

The Whistleblowing Helpline was established in 2003 by the Department of Health to provide advice to NHS staff and employers on the raising of concerns and on the protection of employees who do raise concerns. The Department holds regular meetings with the provider of the Helpline, Mencap, to keep its performance under review.

In the context of changes in the broader health and care system, such as the establishment of the National Guardian and the local guardians network, the Department is considering what role the Helpline should play in ensuring support for whistleblowers. The Department extended the existing contract to allow the Helpline facility to continue operating while future options for the Helpline are considered.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-04-27.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many clinicians will serve on the proposed Clinical Reference Group (CRG) for Rehabilitation and Disability; and how that number compares with the current CRGs that cover the same areas.

Lord Prior of Brampton

To ensure that Clinical Reference Group (CRG) work dovetails with the revised operating model for specialised commissioning, NHS England proposes to simplify the operation of CRGs. It is recommended that the new CRG for Rehabilitation and Disability replaces the existing Specialist rehabilitation for patients with highly complex needs (Complex Rehabilitation) and Complex Disability Equipment Clinical Commissioning Groups. It is proposed that the new CRG should have the following membership:

– a minimum of one member with prosthetics expertise;

– a minimum of one member with expertise in augmentative and alternative communication aids;

– a minimum of one member with expertise in environmental controls; and

– and four members with Complex Rehabilitation expertise (1 from each region).

The new CRG has eight clinical members plus a chair. In the existing two CRG configuration, there are 12 clinical members plus two chairs (one for each CRG). In addition there are also four affiliated organisation members, who tend to be clinicians, in both the current CRGs and the new configuration.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-05-09.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the reasons behind the reduction in the number of consultant clinical pharmacologist posts within the NHS.

Lord Prior of Brampton

Figures published by the Health and Social Care Information Centre show that there has not been a reduction in the number of consultant clinical pharmacologists employed in the National Health Service in England.

As part of its workforce planning, Health Education England (HEE) take account of a range of factors including forecast rates of retirement. HEE has recently undertaken a review of the clinical pharmacology and therapeutics workforce, the findings of which will contribute to future workforce planning for this specialty in England.

It is for the respective Governments in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to consider workforce planning for their health system.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-05-24.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what the process is for ensuring that quick decisions are made about the treatment of critically ill infants suffering from hypophosphatasia in cases where effective drug treatment is available.

Lord Prior of Brampton

National Health Service commissioners are legally required to fund drugs and treatments recommended in National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Highly Specialised Technologies evaluations. If the drug is not recommended, and until NICE’s final guidance is issued, it would be for NHS England to decide whether to make it available to patients.

NICE is currently evaluating asfotase alfa (brand name Strensiq) for the treatment of paediatric-onset hypophosphatasia under its Highly Specialised Technologies programme, which looks at drugs for very small patient populations.

The Evaluation Committee’s preliminary recommendation, published in December 2015 for consultation, was not to recommended asfotase alfa, within its marketing authorisation, for long-term enzyme replacement therapy in paediatric-onset hypophosphatasia to treat the bone manifestations of the disease.

NICE makes its recommendations based on the available evidence and in consultation with stakeholders, including manufacturers and patient groups.

This is not NICE’s final guidance and its recommendations may change after consultation. NICE currently expects to publish its final guidance to the NHS in October 2016.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-07-20.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the Cost Effectiveness Methodology for Immunisation Programmes and Procurements working group’s final report has been provided to the Department of Health, and if so, when that report will be published.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department received the Cost Effectiveness Methodology for Immunisation Programmes and Procurements report on 20 July 2016. The report will be published in due course. A decision on consultation has not yet been made.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-10-13.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend to refer Hewlett-Packard Co (Ltd) to the Competition and Markets Authority for making their printers incompatible with non-HP printer cartridges.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe

The Government does not have the power to direct the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to undertake investigations into breaches of competition law. The CMA is an independent authority which decides on which cases to investigate based on available evidence.

If there is evidence that Hewlett-Packard is acting in an anti-competitive manner, this should be provided to the CMA which will assess it against its published prioritisation principles.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2015-11-03.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether an additional allocation will be made to the National Health Service to compensate for the costs of the proposed increases in fees set out in the options in the consultation paper published by the Care Quality Commission on 2 November.

Lord Prior of Brampton

Government policy for fee-setting regulators is that their chargeable costs should be fully covered through their fees income, in line with HM Treasury Guidance set out in ‘Managing Public Money’.

The proposed fees increases being consulted upon for 2016-17 reflect the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) commitment to achieving full cost recovery, in line with Managing Public Money, within the period of the Spending Review. The fees being charged are therefore funding the CQC as an effective regulator. They allow the CQC’s tough inspection regime to drive up standards across the country, which in turn ensures quality and safety of health and social care provision.

The CQC’s new regulatory model, led by three specialist Chief Inspectors, provides for robust monitoring and inspection of hospitals, adult care providers and general practitioners.

Our expectation is that National Health Service providers should be able to absorb these increases within their overall income which will depend, amongst other factors, on the outcome of the Spending Review and the subsequent tariff setting process for 2016-17.

The Department has also announced that it will make up to £15 million available for general practice in order to cover this and other pressures in 2016/17.

It is for providers to ensure that they have the appropriate capacity and capability in place in order to deliver a safe, high quality service.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2015-11-10.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Prior of Brampton on 2 November (HL2987 and HL2988), what assessment they have made, if any, of whether the Chairman of the Herbal Medicines and Practitioners Working Group ignored the agreed terms of reference of that group by publishing his report without consulting the members of that group, and if so, why.

Lord Prior of Brampton

As the Herbal Medicines and Practitioners Working Group was an independent Group, governance arrangements and internal mechanisms were a matter for the Chair and its members to resolve. The remit of the Group was to consider the issues around herbal medicines and herbal practitioners, and report in 2015 with recommendations on the way forward. The overall remit was met.