Tag: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government on what basis the contract for the existing NHS Whistleblowing Helpline has been extended, and whether they plan to further extend that contract.

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 why NHS England has refused to pay the costs of making available pre-exposure prophylaxis in order to protect men from HIV.

Lord Prior of Brampton

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a new use of HIV drugs which has shown clinical effectiveness in research trials at preventing HIV in people at high risk of getting HIV such as men who have sex with men (MSM) and people with HIV-positive partners. The drug used in the trials, Truvada, is not yet licenced for use as PrEP. Public Health England (PHE) has undertaken modelling work looking at cost-effectiveness of PrEP. Much depends on the price of the drugs and HIV prevalence in the target group. However, as with any new intervention, PrEP now needs to be properly assessed in relation to cost effectiveness to see how it could be commissioned in the most sustainable and integrated way and how it compares with other cost-effective approaches. The Department is considering this with PHE, NHS England and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

NHS England has agreed to carefully consider their position on commissioning pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Planning continues on the early implementer tests sites in the meantime. Irrespective of the commissioning arrangements for PrEP, decisions to fund will depend on full assessment of clinical and cost effectiveness and how it can be integrated with other HIV prevention efforts.

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 impact on the NHS of the predicted loss of 35 per cent of current clinical pharmacologist consultant posts through retirements in the next decade and the reduction in the number of training grade clinical pharmacologist posts, as set out in the report by the British Pharmacological Society, A Prescription for the NHS: Recognising the value of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

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 2016-05-23.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the decision to delay inquiring into wider governance issues at the Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust and the role that the Trust is being asked to play in helping the re-configuration of services in Staffordshire are connected, and if so, how.

Lord Prior of Brampton

NHS Improvement advises that Verita’s report Independent review of the handling by The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust of concerns raised by and related to Mrs Haynes-Kirkbright was undertaken and published independently of Government and of any role the Trust played in the reconfiguration of services in Staffordshire. The review did not relate in any way to the reconfiguration.

The content and timing of the review into wider concerns about governance at the Trust will not be affected in any way by the Staffordshire reconfiguration.

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the scope of the Cost Effectiveness Methodology for Immunisation Programmes and Procurements working group has shifted from its original purpose, and if so, why.

Lord Prior of Brampton

No, the Terms of Reference have not changed.

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 impact of the closure of accident and emergency services at Burnley 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 2015-11-03.

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.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2015-11-24.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what recourse or right of appeal is available to a member of the public removed from, or prevented from working with, a local healthwatch by the contractors.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department currently has no plans to undertake an investigation in to the performance of local Healthwatch organisations. In March 2015 the Department published a report commissioned from the King’s Fund – Local Healthwatch: Progress and promise – which set out the progress that local Healthwatch have made since being established in 2013. Transparency about the performance of local Healthwatch organisations is provided through the annual reports which they are required to publish. Reports on how the local Healthwatch network as a whole is operating and the nature of the support needed to deliver their activities effectively are discussed at quarterly public meetings of the Healthwatch England Committee.

Arrangements for ensuring local Healthwatch statutory activities are delivered in each area are a matter for local authorities. The Local Government Association has published guidance to support local Healthwatch and local commissioners in putting in place good governance arrangements, which includes clarity about the roles of all parties involved.

Neither the Department nor Healthwatch England are aware of local Healthwatch contractors refusing to engage with the public in their area. Where Healthwatch England is made aware of concerns in relation to local Healthwatch around governance or local relationships with specific individuals or organisations, it seeks to provide support to resolve these where appropriate. Members of the public are able to raise concerns though the complaints process of the local Healthwatch or the commissioning local authority.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2015-12-15.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how the NHS Strategic Projects Team is to be held to account for the advice it gave to the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group, and to the NHS Commissioning Board, on the contract for older people’s services in Cambridge and Peterborough.

Lord Prior of Brampton

NHS England advises that it will be commissioning an investigation into the circumstances leading up to the termination of the contract between Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group and UnitingCare Partnership LLP to deliver urgent care for the over 65s and adult community services. This will include the role of the Strategic Projects Team. NHS England is also considering how similar contracts will be managed and assured in the future.