Tag: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-04-25.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the open letter from the British Dental Association to the Chairman of the General Dental Council (GDC) of 1 April on the GDC’s spending on external legal advice, redundancy payments and related external PR services during the Professional Services Authority whistle-blowing inquiry, and what action they intend to take in the light of that assessment.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The General Dental Council (GDC) is an independent statutory body. Ministers take a keen interest in the performance of the GDC and its plans for improvement, particularly in light of the Professional Standards Authority’s (PSA) performance review and publication of its investigation into concerns raised by a whistleblower. A copy of the PSA’s report, A report on the investigation into the General Dental Council’s handling of a whistleblower’s disclosure about the Investigating Committee, is attached.

The GDC is required under the Dentist Act 1984 to prepare a statement of accounts and for those accounts to be audited. These accounts would cover all expenditure including that during the PSA investigation. The statement of accounts and auditor’s report are then published and properly scrutinised, including being certified and reported on by the Controller and Auditor General and being laid before Parliament and the Scottish Parliament by the Privy Council.

The Department has no plans to ask the National Audit Office to carry out a value for money examination of the GDC’s financial management.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-05-03.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what mechanisms are in place to safeguard patients from delays to return hospital appointments beyond the clinically recommended time.

Lord Prior of Brampton

All follow up appointments (also known as planned, surveillance or recall appointments) should take place when clinically appropriate. It is for clinicians to make decisions on when they see patients, in line with their clinical priority, and patients should not experience undue delay at any stage of their referral, diagnosis or treatment. Moreover, the appropriate interval for follow up appointments will vary between different services or specialties, and between individual patients, depending on the severity of their condition.

To ensure that patients are seen at the appropriate time, NHS England guidance is clear that when patients on planned lists are clinically ready for their care to commence and reach the date for their planned appointment, they should either receive that appointment or be transferred to an active waiting list. At that point, a waiting time clock will be started and their wait reported in the relevant statistical return, so that patients are not waiting on ‘hidden’ lists.

Furthermore, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) also assesses providers against the new fundamental standards of safety and quality below which care should never fail. One of these standards requires that care and treatment must be appropriate and reflect service users’ needs and preferences. Another requires that care and treatment must be provided in a safe way. The CQC will require a provider to improve where it is not meeting these standards.

No assessment has been made of the clinical risks to patients of follow-up appointments being scheduled beyond clinically recommended times, as the risks will also vary between services, specialties and patients. It is for clinicians to make these judgements.

The information requested on delays to review outpatient appointments is not collected centrally.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-05-23.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the new review into the governance of the Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust will take account of evidence submitted to the independent review of the handling by the Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust of concerns raised by and related to Mrs Haynes-Kirkbright.

Lord Prior of Brampton

These are matters in the first instance for NHS Improvement. The Verita report, Independent review of the handling by The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust of concerns raised by and related to Mrs Haynes-Kirkbright, was commissioned by the NHS Trust Development Authority – a forerunner organisation – independently of Government.

NHS Improvement is commissioning a governance review to consider issues highlighted by the Verita report. A copy of the terms of reference for the new governance review are attached.

Verita was originally requested (under specific terms of reference) to review and provide a dedicated report on the handling by the Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust of concerns raised by and related to Mrs Haynes-Kirkbright. Governance issues that fell outside of those terms of reference will be considered in the new review, to ensure thorough investigation.

The new review will take into account evidence provided by Mrs Haynes-Kirkbright and others in the course of the Verita review.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-07-19.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the National Audit Office (NAO) investigation into the collapse of the Uniting Care Partnership Contract in Cambridge and Peterborough, whether they intend to hold to account (1) the Strategic Projects Team, (2) Monitor, and (3) NHS England, for the failings identified in the NAO’s report.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department welcomes the National Audit Office (NAO) report. Decisions about the Strategic Projects Team (SPT) are, however, for NHS England. Following an internal review and the NAO report, NHS England identified concerns about the work of the SPT. As a result, the SPT will close and all its ongoing commitments will be reviewed with a view to bringing them to a conclusion.

NHS Improvement advises that it also welcomes the NAO report and is working closely with NHS England and the Department to consider assurance processes for such complex transactions. NHS Improvement further advises that its focus since May has been liaison with the NAO on its report and joint consideration with NHS England of the assurance issues raised.

NHS England confirms that the NAO investigation supports the findings of its previously published independent review. Before the NAO investigation, NHS England had already commissioned a follow-up review focusing on the role of external advisors, the effectiveness of the Gateway review process, and the role of the clinical commissioning group leadership and governing body. This work continues and NHS England expects to publish findings later this summer.

More widely, NHS England has been undertaking assessments of current and planned novel contracts and is developing an assurance framework for contracts of this sort. This is being informed by the findings of the Uniting Care reviews.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-09-14.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the handover time of patients from ambulances to hospital staff at the Royal Blackburn Hospital.

Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen

No such assessments have been made. The provision of accident and emergency (A&E) services at the Royal Blackburn Hospital is a matter for the local National Health Service. The NHS in East Lancashire has established an A&E delivery board to oversee system performance and the effective delivery of urgent and emergency care locally.

Ministers consult weekly with NHS Improvement and the Care Quality Commission about A&E performance.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2015-10-29.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they have ensured that the National Health Service has fully absorbed the lessons of the Public Accounts Committee report identifying significant weaknesses in central government’s capacity to monitor and enforce contracts with large private companies.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department is addressing the recommendations set out in the Public Accounts Committee Report. Through our normal accountability arrangements we have sought assurance from our arm’s length bodies (ALBs), including NHS England, that they have the necessary organisational architecture in place to support good contract management and will continually strive to improve by applying best practice. The Department is building a contract management function which will seek to advise ALBs on how to apply effective contract management.

Each ALB will be responsible for determining its next steps. Each ALB will need to provide the necessary assurances that it is operating effectively and that it has the requisite capability and capacity to support effective contract management of significant amounts of public money.

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the future role of NHS Foundation Trusts in the NHS.

Lord Prior of Brampton

We will continue to discuss the role of foundation trusts (FTs) in the National Health Service with the leaders of NHS Improvement as the organisation moves to a more aligned approach to the regulation and oversight of FTs and NHS trusts.

The clinical and economic sustainability of all trusts is of paramount importance, and NHS Improvement will continue to support NHS providers to determine the most appropriate means of securing their long-term future.

The NHS Trust Development Authority is continuing to refer organisations to Monitor for FT authorisation decisions. No decisions have yet been made about how this activity will be undertaken by NHS Improvement from 1 April 2016.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2015-11-19.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the additional costs to the NHS of the introduction of the single state pension in April 2016, which will remove the national insurance rebate currently received by NHS employers offering final salary schemes.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Spending Review has announced that National Health Service funding will rise by £3.8 billion in real terms in 2016-17 and by £8 billion in real terms by 2020-21, compared to 2015-16. It is estimated that changes to the state pension, from April 2016, will cost the NHS £1.1 billion.

This funding will enable the NHS to meet a range of cost pressures, including increased costs for NHS employers of the introduction of the single state pension.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2015-12-08.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will publish implementation plans for the rollout of the system of medical examiners in the NHS now that the Spending Review has been published.

Lord Prior of Brampton

Following the Spending Review, further work on the reforms to death certification and the introduction of medical examiners will be subject to confirmation of spending priorities through the normal business planning cycle. We will provide an update on the implementation plans and timetables as soon as we are able.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2015-12-22.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they plan to ensure that, in the implementation of the NHS Supply Chain generic project plans for a national formulary for wound care, innovative small companies are not at a disadvantage in bidding for contracts.

Lord Prior of Brampton

Innovation is welcomed as part of this process and the clinical specifications may support smaller companies who demonstrate their capability to meet the requirements. One advantage of the NHS Supply Chain venture for smaller companies is that it can act as a single point of entry into the National Health Service and lower the ‘cost of sales’.