Tag: Lord Mawhinney

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-04-11.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how often the storage mechanisms and substance of patients’ confidential and private information held by pharmacies in the retail sector is examined by or on behalf of the General Pharmaceutical Council; and what percentage of examinations are unacceptable.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department does not hold this information. However, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has provided the following information.

The GPhC undertakes inspections of all registered pharmacies in Great Britain. The vast majority of pharmacies currently receive a routine inspection every three to four years. Inspectors will, in addition, visit pharmacies to investigate concerns from members of the public or health professionals.

Since November 2013 the GPhC has conducted 6,814 routine inspections of pharmacy premises to assess them against its standards. During every inspection GPhC inspectors seek evidence from the pharmacy team that standards relating to the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public are met. These standards cover the storage of confidential and private information and the physical and governance arrangements for ensuring patients can have private conversations with pharmacy professionals.

Of the 6,814 inspections that have been carried out by the GPhC since November 2013, in 421 (6.2%) cases pharmacy premises were found to have failed one or more of the above three standards:

– 274 did not meet standard 1.7 (Information is managed to protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services);

– 174 did not meet standard 3.2 (Premises protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services); and

– 73 did not meet standard 5.3 (Equipment and facilities are used in a way that protects the privacy and dignity of the patients and the public who receive pharmacy services).

When pharmacy premises have not met one or more of the standards, they are required by the GPhC to complete and implement an improvement action plan.

In addition, the United Kingdom and Scottish Parliaments recently approved legislation which includes powers to issue an improvement notice or disqualify a pharmacy from the register for a failure to meet the standards. This will improve the GPhC’s ability to protect patients and improve the quality of the pharmacy services they receive.

In circumstances where the GPhC finds a registered professional’s fitness to practise is called into question it will investigate and can bring proceedings against that individual.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-04-11.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how often the physical and governance arrangements which ensure that patients can have private conversations with pharmaceutical staff, in the retail sector, are examined by or on behalf of the General Pharmaceutical Council and what percentage of examinations are unacceptable.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department does not hold this information. However, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has provided the following information.

The GPhC undertakes inspections of all registered pharmacies in Great Britain. The vast majority of pharmacies currently receive a routine inspection every three to four years. Inspectors will, in addition, visit pharmacies to investigate concerns from members of the public or health professionals.

Since November 2013 the GPhC has conducted 6,814 routine inspections of pharmacy premises to assess them against its standards. During every inspection GPhC inspectors seek evidence from the pharmacy team that standards relating to the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public are met. These standards cover the storage of confidential and private information and the physical and governance arrangements for ensuring patients can have private conversations with pharmacy professionals.

Of the 6,814 inspections that have been carried out by the GPhC since November 2013, in 421 (6.2%) cases pharmacy premises were found to have failed one or more of the above three standards:

– 274 did not meet standard 1.7 (Information is managed to protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services);

– 174 did not meet standard 3.2 (Premises protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services); and

– 73 did not meet standard 5.3 (Equipment and facilities are used in a way that protects the privacy and dignity of the patients and the public who receive pharmacy services).

When pharmacy premises have not met one or more of the standards, they are required by the GPhC to complete and implement an improvement action plan.

In addition, the United Kingdom and Scottish Parliaments recently approved legislation which includes powers to issue an improvement notice or disqualify a pharmacy from the register for a failure to meet the standards. This will improve the GPhC’s ability to protect patients and improve the quality of the pharmacy services they receive.

In circumstances where the GPhC finds a registered professional’s fitness to practise is called into question it will investigate and can bring proceedings against that individual.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-04-11.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many pharmacies in the retail sector have been (1) reprimanded, and (2) sanctioned, by the General Pharmaceutical Council, in the last three years, for breaching patient confidentiality.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department does not hold this information. However, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has provided the following information.

The GPhC undertakes inspections of all registered pharmacies in Great Britain. The vast majority of pharmacies currently receive a routine inspection every three to four years. Inspectors will, in addition, visit pharmacies to investigate concerns from members of the public or health professionals.

Since November 2013 the GPhC has conducted 6,814 routine inspections of pharmacy premises to assess them against its standards. During every inspection GPhC inspectors seek evidence from the pharmacy team that standards relating to the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public are met. These standards cover the storage of confidential and private information and the physical and governance arrangements for ensuring patients can have private conversations with pharmacy professionals.

Of the 6,814 inspections that have been carried out by the GPhC since November 2013, in 421 (6.2%) cases pharmacy premises were found to have failed one or more of the above three standards:

– 274 did not meet standard 1.7 (Information is managed to protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services);

– 174 did not meet standard 3.2 (Premises protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services); and

– 73 did not meet standard 5.3 (Equipment and facilities are used in a way that protects the privacy and dignity of the patients and the public who receive pharmacy services).

When pharmacy premises have not met one or more of the standards, they are required by the GPhC to complete and implement an improvement action plan.

In addition, the United Kingdom and Scottish Parliaments recently approved legislation which includes powers to issue an improvement notice or disqualify a pharmacy from the register for a failure to meet the standards. This will improve the GPhC’s ability to protect patients and improve the quality of the pharmacy services they receive.

In circumstances where the GPhC finds a registered professional’s fitness to practise is called into question it will investigate and can bring proceedings against that individual.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-04-11.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many pharmacies in the retail sector have been (1) reprimanded, and (2) sanctioned, by the General Pharmaceutical Council, in the last three years, for breaching patient privacy.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department does not hold this information. However, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has provided the following information.

The GPhC undertakes inspections of all registered pharmacies in Great Britain. The vast majority of pharmacies currently receive a routine inspection every three to four years. Inspectors will, in addition, visit pharmacies to investigate concerns from members of the public or health professionals.

Since November 2013 the GPhC has conducted 6,814 routine inspections of pharmacy premises to assess them against its standards. During every inspection GPhC inspectors seek evidence from the pharmacy team that standards relating to the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public are met. These standards cover the storage of confidential and private information and the physical and governance arrangements for ensuring patients can have private conversations with pharmacy professionals.

Of the 6,814 inspections that have been carried out by the GPhC since November 2013, in 421 (6.2%) cases pharmacy premises were found to have failed one or more of the above three standards:

– 274 did not meet standard 1.7 (Information is managed to protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services);

– 174 did not meet standard 3.2 (Premises protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services); and

– 73 did not meet standard 5.3 (Equipment and facilities are used in a way that protects the privacy and dignity of the patients and the public who receive pharmacy services).

When pharmacy premises have not met one or more of the standards, they are required by the GPhC to complete and implement an improvement action plan.

In addition, the United Kingdom and Scottish Parliaments recently approved legislation which includes powers to issue an improvement notice or disqualify a pharmacy from the register for a failure to meet the standards. This will improve the GPhC’s ability to protect patients and improve the quality of the pharmacy services they receive.

In circumstances where the GPhC finds a registered professional’s fitness to practise is called into question it will investigate and can bring proceedings against that individual.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-04-11.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many pharmacies in the retail sector have been (1) reprimanded, and (2) sanctioned, by the General Pharmaceutical Council, in the last three years, for breaching patient dignity.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department does not hold this information. However, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has provided the following information.

The GPhC undertakes inspections of all registered pharmacies in Great Britain. The vast majority of pharmacies currently receive a routine inspection every three to four years. Inspectors will, in addition, visit pharmacies to investigate concerns from members of the public or health professionals.

Since November 2013 the GPhC has conducted 6,814 routine inspections of pharmacy premises to assess them against its standards. During every inspection GPhC inspectors seek evidence from the pharmacy team that standards relating to the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public are met. These standards cover the storage of confidential and private information and the physical and governance arrangements for ensuring patients can have private conversations with pharmacy professionals.

Of the 6,814 inspections that have been carried out by the GPhC since November 2013, in 421 (6.2%) cases pharmacy premises were found to have failed one or more of the above three standards:

– 274 did not meet standard 1.7 (Information is managed to protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services);

– 174 did not meet standard 3.2 (Premises protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services); and

– 73 did not meet standard 5.3 (Equipment and facilities are used in a way that protects the privacy and dignity of the patients and the public who receive pharmacy services).

When pharmacy premises have not met one or more of the standards, they are required by the GPhC to complete and implement an improvement action plan.

In addition, the United Kingdom and Scottish Parliaments recently approved legislation which includes powers to issue an improvement notice or disqualify a pharmacy from the register for a failure to meet the standards. This will improve the GPhC’s ability to protect patients and improve the quality of the pharmacy services they receive.

In circumstances where the GPhC finds a registered professional’s fitness to practise is called into question it will investigate and can bring proceedings against that individual.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-04-11.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the principal criteria which must be addressed by pharmacies in the retail sector when they provide information governance assurances” to the NHS annually.”

Lord Prior of Brampton

All National Health Service providers, including community pharmacies, are required to provide information governance assurances to the NHS on an annual basis. These assurances are provided through completion of an online assessment tool, the NHS Information Governance Toolkit.

Community pharmacies and dispensing appliance contractors currently have to assess themselves against the following requirements:

Information Governance Management

– Responsibility for Information Governance has been assigned to an appropriate member, or members, of staff;

– There is an information governance policy that addresses the overall requirements of information governance;

– All contracts (staff, contractor and third party) contain clauses that clearly identify information governance responsibilities; and

– All staff members are provided with appropriate training on information governance requirements.

Confidentiality and Data Protection Assurance

– All person identifiable data processed outside of the United Kingdom complies with the Data Protection Act 1998 and Department of Health guidelines;

– Consent is appropriately sought before personal information is used in ways that do not directly contribute to the delivery of care services and objections to the disclosure of confidential personal information are appropriately respected;

– There is a publicly available and easy to understand information leaflet that informs patients/service users how their information is used, who may have access to that information, and their own rights to see and obtain copies of their records; and

– There is a confidentiality code of conduct that provides staff with clear guidance on the disclosure of personal information.

Information Security Assurance

– Monitoring and enforcement processes are in place to ensure NHS national application Smartcard users comply with the terms and conditions of use;

– There is an information asset register that includes all key information, software, hardware and services;

– Unauthorised access to the premises, equipment, records and other assets is prevented;

– The use of mobile computing systems is controlled, monitored and audited to ensure their correct operation and to prevent unauthorised access;

– There are documented plans and procedures to support business continuity in the event of power failures, system failures, natural disasters and other disruptions;

– There are documented incident management and reporting procedures;

– There are appropriate procedures in place to manage access to computer-based information systems; and

– All transfers of hardcopy and digital personal and sensitive information have been identified, mapped and risk assessed; technical and organisational measures adequately secure these transfers.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-07-06.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many, and what percentage of, NHS providers have signed up to the first round of proposed control totals; and how they plan to respond to those providers who (1) have not signed up, or (2) refuse to do so.

Lord Prior of Brampton

NHS Improvement continues to work with those providers who have not been able to agree control totals by the end of July. At present, 213 of 238 providers (89.5%) have an agreed a control total. Those providers who have been unable to agree a control total will not be able to access the sustainability and transformation fund.

NHS Improvement is currently consulting on a new oversight regime, which details proposals on how providers will be monitored in future and this will set out how variance from financial plan or control total will be managed.

NHS Improvement does not intend to replace the boards of those providers who do not achieve financial balance by the end of 2016/17. The organisation’s new oversight regime also sets out in detail how it proposes to monitor and support providers.

The Government’s Mandate to the NHS 2016-17, a copy of which is attached, confirms that the National Health Service must ensure that it balances its budget, including commissioners and providers living within their budgets. To support this, £1.8 billion of NHS England’s budget for 2016-17 will be allocated through the Sustainability and Transformation Fund to support providers, in particular emergency services, payable through commissioning or as other support.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-07-06.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the membership of those NHS provider boards that do not achieve financial balance by the end of 2016–17 will be replaced.

Lord Prior of Brampton

NHS Improvement continues to work with those providers who have not been able to agree control totals by the end of July. At present, 213 of 238 providers (89.5%) have an agreed a control total. Those providers who have been unable to agree a control total will not be able to access the sustainability and transformation fund.

NHS Improvement is currently consulting on a new oversight regime, which details proposals on how providers will be monitored in future and this will set out how variance from financial plan or control total will be managed.

NHS Improvement does not intend to replace the boards of those providers who do not achieve financial balance by the end of 2016/17. The organisation’s new oversight regime also sets out in detail how it proposes to monitor and support providers.

The Government’s Mandate to the NHS 2016-17, a copy of which is attached, confirms that the National Health Service must ensure that it balances its budget, including commissioners and providers living within their budgets. To support this, £1.8 billion of NHS England’s budget for 2016-17 will be allocated through the Sustainability and Transformation Fund to support providers, in particular emergency services, payable through commissioning or as other support.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-01-20.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what powers they have, if any, to overrule local authorities that grant planning permission that allows residential or commercial properties to be built on land designated as a flood plain.

Baroness Williams of Trafford

The Secretary of State has specific intervention powers to consider an application for himself before a decision has been issued by the local planning authority and powers to revoke or modify a planning permission before the permission is implemented. Local planning authorities, through their Local Plans and planning decisions are expected to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding by directing development away from areas at highest risk, including floodplains. Between April 2011 and March 2015, over 99 percent of proposed new homes had planning outcomes in line with Environment Agency advice where they had been made aware of the decision.

All local planning authorities are expected to follow the strict tests set out in national planning policy and guidance. Where these tests are not met, national policy is very clear that new development should not be allowed.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Mawhinney on 2016-07-06.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government by how much they estimate the deficit of NHS providers will have been reduced by the end of the 2016–17.

Lord Prior of Brampton

NHS Improvement continues to work with those providers who have not been able to agree control totals by the end of July. At present, 213 of 238 providers (89.5%) have an agreed a control total. Those providers who have been unable to agree a control total will not be able to access the sustainability and transformation fund.

NHS Improvement is currently consulting on a new oversight regime, which details proposals on how providers will be monitored in future and this will set out how variance from financial plan or control total will be managed.

NHS Improvement does not intend to replace the boards of those providers who do not achieve financial balance by the end of 2016/17. The organisation’s new oversight regime also sets out in detail how it proposes to monitor and support providers.

The Government’s Mandate to the NHS 2016-17, a copy of which is attached, confirms that the National Health Service must ensure that it balances its budget, including commissioners and providers living within their budgets. To support this, £1.8 billion of NHS England’s budget for 2016-17 will be allocated through the Sustainability and Transformation Fund to support providers, in particular emergency services, payable through commissioning or as other support.