Tag: Parliamentary Question

  • Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Lord Hunt of Kings Heath – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 2016-03-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 4 January (HL4800), what evidence they have that suggests that the complexity of choice in wound dressings for nurses and clinicians makes their clinical decisions more difficult and can lead to over-specification and variation in standards of care.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    The NHS Catalogue contained over 600,000 products, many of which had been not used in excess of the last 12 months or were seemingly duplicate items. Given the sheer volume of products, this creates the complexity faced by clinicians and nurses when determining the appropriate products to use, which directly makes their decisions more difficult.

    By undertaking the planned clinical rationalisation of the products available via NHS Supply Chain, the Department aims to reduce this complexity, removing unnecessary products, ensuring that those available to the National Health Service are of an appropriate specification in order to maintain high standards of patient care.

    The clinical rationalisation work is being undertaken by practising clinicians taking into account feedback from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and other relevant programmes, such as ‘ Getting it Right First Time’.

  • Royston Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Royston Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Royston Smith on 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the average cost is per patient attending a GP’s surgery in Southampton.

    Alistair Burt

    The requested information is not collected.

    NHS England advises that general practitioners (GPs) are funded per head of population to deliver GP medical services. The Southampton Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) will be commissioning primary care on behalf of NHS England from 1 April 2016 and NHS England confirms across the CCG’s forecast population this funding is £124 per head of population.

  • Anne Main – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Anne Main – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Anne Main on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the implications for his Department’s policies of the Report, Nicotine without smoke: tobacco harm reduction, published by the Royal College of Physicians in April 2016.

    Jane Ellison

    The Department has and will continue to keep abreast of all evidence and consider it in developing policy. The report published by the Royal College of Physicians is consistent with the Government’s current policy that the best thing a smoker can do for their health is to quit smoking and quit for good but that e-cigarettes have a role to play in helping some people quit.

  • Lord Lisvane – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Lord Lisvane – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Lisvane on 2016-06-08.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many of the measures announced in the Queen’s Speech will be published in draft and subject to pre-legislative scrutiny.

    Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

    The Government is committed to facilitating pre-legislative scrutiny when it is possible to do so. In the last session five draft Bills or packages of draft legislation were published. Announcements will be made in due course about draft legislation to be published in the current session.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-09-05.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the station to be built at Euston in accordance with Additional Provision 3 to the High Speed Rail (London–West Midlands) Bill will be designed in such a way that Regulation 3 of the Fire Precautions (Sub-surface Railway Stations) (England) Regulations 2009 applies.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    Regulation 3, of The Fire Precautions (Sub-surface Railway Stations) (England) Regulations 2009, provides a definition for whether a railway station is classified as a sub-surface railway station. The definition is based on the extent of enclosed/below ground platforms and tracks within a public railway station. When the definition is met the Regulations apply.

    The high speed station at Euston is defined as a sub-surface railway station (as per Regulation 3). The Regulations are applied to the design of the high speed station, and the existing LU Station.

    The Regulations have not been applied to the existing conventional station, which is not currently classified as a sub-surface railway station.

  • Baroness Walmsley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Baroness Walmsley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Walmsley on 2016-10-20.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what proportion of clinical commissioning groups have undertaken a systematic audit across GP practices to identify people with (1) possible undiagnosed atrial fibrillation, and (2) atrial fibrillation at high risk of stroke who are not anticoagulated or maintained in therapeutic range.

    Lord Prior of Brampton

    NHS England’s Sustainable Improvement Team is taking action to promote the use of GRASP-AF (Guidance on Risk Assessment and Stroke Prevention for Atrial Fibrillation) within general practitioner (GP) practices in England. GRASP-AF is an audit tool developed by and trialled in the National Health Service which greatly simplifies the process of identifying patients with Atrial Fibrillation (AF) who are not receiving the right management to help reduce their risk of stroke.

    The Sustainable Improvement Team is also working with NHS RightCare, a programme committed to improving people’s health and outcomes, to help promote the use of GRASP-AF in the programme’s 65 first wave clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). NHS RightCare’s ‘Commissioning for Value’ packs help CCGs identify priority areas such as AF, and the GRASP AF tool provides a practical method of addressing any inequalities. NHS England’s intention is that the work with NHS RightCare will increase the number of CCGs using GRASP-AF in a systematic way.

    Anonymised data from GRASP-AF can be uploaded to CHART Online, a secure web enabled tool that helps practices improve performance through comparative data analysis. This allows practices and CCGs to benchmark their management of AF with other practices across England and so help identify and reduce any variation in practice.

    The use of GRASP-AF is voluntary and its use therefore varies across CCGs. Currently 2,248 GP practices have uploaded data from GRASP-AF to CHART online across 151 out of the 209 CCGs. Of these, 19 CCGs have all GP practices in their area uploading data.

    In addition to the NHS action outlined above, all local authorities in England are required to offer the NHS Health Check programme, with the large majority commissioning general practice to provide them on their behalf. More than 15 million people aged 40-74 are, have been or will be eligible for an NHS Health Check between 2014 and 2018. The programme’s best practice guidance recommends that a pulse check is carried out as part of the process of taking a blood pressure reading and those individuals who are found to have an irregular pulse rhythm should be referred for further investigation.

  • Ian Lavery – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Ian Lavery – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Lavery on 2016-03-14.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, on what dates the National Flood Resilience Review met; what the dates are for future meetings of that review; and if he will publish the (a) agendas for and (b) minutes of meetings of that review.

    Mr Oliver Letwin

    The National Flood Resilience Review Group meets regularly to review progress of the review. We do not comment on specific date, nor do we publish agendas or minutes

    The National Floods Resilience Review Group is chaired by Oliver Letwin and consists of Ministers and senior officials from relevant departments, including Defra, DECC, DfT, DCLG, HMT, DCMS, the Environment Agency and the Met Office.

  • Jim Shannon – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Jim Shannon – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Shannon on 2015-11-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to increase the number of educational programmes on cancer screening.

    Jane Ellison

    The UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) advises Ministers and the National Health Service in all four countries about all aspects of screening policy. The UK NSC reviews its recommendations on a three year basis or earlier if any new peer reviewed evidence emerges.

    The UK NSC is currently reviewing the evidence on whether human papillomavirus testing as primary screening for cervical disease should replace the currently used cytology test and whether faecal immunochemical testing could be used as the primary screening marker in the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Public consultations on both reviews have just closed and the UK NSC is expected to make a recommendation to ministers later this month.

    The NHS Breast Screening Programme is currently carrying out a long-term trial to investigate extending current screening eligibility to women aged 47-49 and 71-73. Over two million women have taken part in a randomised control trial, with the impact on breast cancer mortality rates due to be reported in the early 2020s. The UK NSC will consider the research evidence when it is published.

    We are not aware of steps being taken by employers to enable staff to take time off work to attend cancer screening appointments. However, Macmillan has produced, “Your rights at work” an information leaflet on reasonable adjustments in the workplace for people who have or have had cancer.

    In 2011, the UK NSC recommended that bowel scope screening could be offered in addition to the homes testing kit as part of the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Currently 76% of bowel scope screening centres in England are operational, and the Secretary of State’s commitment is to have this programme rolled out to all screening centres in England by the end of 2016. Health Education England has commissioned a training pilot for non-medical endoscopists (NMEs) to provide accelerated training in certain diagnostics procedures, with the aim of providing additional screening capacity. The pilot will commence in January 2016. A framework has also been developed to help NMEs demonstrate that they have achieved the competency levels required for their role.

    The NHS Screening Programmes have a dedicated team who oversee education, training and stakeholder information. This involves working closely with Royal Colleges, Professional bodies, stakeholder groups, NHS England, Health Education England and the Public Health England campaigns team. A vast range of educational resources exist which are free to NHS staff and cover all screening programme plus the theory and practice of screening. The team is currently expanding the range of taught courses and e-learning resources to make learning more accessible. Accessible patient information is available to educate users of the service and enable informed choices regarding screening. This is complemented by a comprehensive set of material on NHS Choices regarding all 11 NHS Screening Programmes. Patient information is constantly updated and users are involved in the reviews and evaluation of all materials.

    To increase rates of cervical screening in young women, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme has commissioned a £1 million study to determine which interventions are effective at increasing screening uptake amongst women who are receiving their first invitation from the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. The study began in November 2011 and reports can be expected in spring 2016.

    In addition, the Department of Health Behavioural Insight team is developing a trial to investigate the use of behavioural insights to optimise the content of the invitation letter for cervical screening.

  • Wayne David – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Wayne David – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Wayne David on 2015-12-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the effect on families of prisoners of the sale of inner-city prisons and their replacement with out of town buildings.

    Andrew Selous

    In looking at our strategy for the future configuration of the prison estate, we will consider a range of factors including the ability of families to access visits. Beyond the closure of HMP Holloway, no decision on further closures, or where any new prisons will be sited, has been made.

  • Baroness Tonge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Baroness Tonge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Baroness Tonge on 2016-01-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the level of involvement of the British company G4S in running prisons in Israel.

    Baroness Anelay of St Johns

    While the British Government has not made an assessment of the level of involvement of G4S in the running of Israeli prisons, we have made clear in meetings with G4S our concerns about Israel’s conduct of the occupation. In April 2013, G4S publicly confirmed that they would not renew a number of security contracts in the West Bank ‘to ensure that G4S Israel business practices remain in line with our own business ethics policy’. These include the servicing of security equipment at Ofer Military Prison, at West Bank checkpoints and at a police station in the contentious E-1 area of the West Bank.