Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

227852

	registered interest
	date	17/03/2015
	answering body	Department of Health
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Mental Health Services
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, by what mechanisms does his Department hold to account local agencies which have signed up to the Crisis Care Concordat for fulfilling its provisions; and what steps he plans to take in response to such local agencies which do not implement the provisions of that concordat.
	tabling member constituency	Liverpool, Wavertree
	tabling member printed	Luciana Berger
	uin	227901
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/03/2015 answer text <p>The Government’s Mandate to NHS England sets out clearly that “we expect NHS England to make rapid progress, working with CCGs and other commissioners, to help deliver on our shared goal to have crisis services that, for an individual, are at all times as accessible, responsive and high quality as other health emergency services.” The Mandate also states that the Government expects “every community to have plans to ensure no one in crisis will be turned away” based on the principles set out in the Crisis Care Concordat.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>It is the role of clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in England to understand the local demand for crisis services and provide adequate levels of service. NHS England has a generic assurance process which considers how effective CCGs are in discharging their responsibilities. This is an evidence-based process which is designed to challenge where statutory duties are not being met. The revised CCG assurance framework for 2015/16 will have a particular focus on statutory duties.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The current planning guidance for CCGs, issued in December 2014, which they must have regard to, and which will be part of NHS England’s assurance process, makes specific reference to Concordat action plans, which should enshrine “the actions required of commissioners and providers to ensure that those experiencing a mental health crisis are properly supported”, and sets out the requirements of CCGs including for “the provision of mental health support as an integral part of NHS 111 services; 24/7 Crisis Care Home Treatment Teams; and the need to ensure that there is enough capacity to prevent children, young people or vulnerable adults, undergoing mental health assessments in police cells.” In designing Concordat action plans, the Department has asked local partners to pay particular attention to NHS England’s planning guidance and the Department, NHS England and Mind are supporting all areas to develop their plans and improve existing plans on an ongoing basis.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>We have asked local areas to have governance structures in place to ensure strong local accountability in the monitoring of delivery of actions. The national Crisis Care Concordat works on the basis that all national signatories are jointly accountable to one another and we have asked local partners to adopt a similar approach to ensure that the spirit of collaborative working towards the mutual goal of improving mental health crisis care services for people of all ages is maintained.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has recently carried out local area inspections of services that respond to people experiencing a mental health crisis. CQC will provide feedback to those localities; this enables services to identify areas for improvement which can in turn be addressed through Concordat action plans. In addition, the final report will outline CQC’s plans for inspecting regulated providers that respond to people experiencing a mental health crisis so that key issues are routinely considered within their regulation of services, alongside recommendations for partners across the health and social care sector who have a responsibility towards people in crisis. CQC is seeking to publish the report later in 2015.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Crisis Teams and Health-based Places of Safety have been defined as core services under CQC’s new inspection model for mental health services, and will be rated by CQC as part of the comprehensive inspection process. As a key partner to the national Crisis Care Concordat, CQC will take into account the Concordat’s principles as part of this process.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North Norfolk answering member printed Norman Lamb question first answered 23/03/2015 17:21:03 answering member 1439 label Biography information for Norman Lamb
	tabling member	4036 label Biography information for Luciana Berger

171168

	registered interest
	date	17/12/2014
	answering body	Department of Health
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Mental Health Services
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, for how long each person has been detained under Section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983 in each case where the place of safety was a police cell since 2010; and what the length of wait between assessment and transfer to hospital was in each such case.
	tabling member constituency	Sutton and Cheam
	tabling member printed	Paul Burstow
	uin	219331
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/01/2015 answer text <p>We do not collect the information requested centrally. However, according to the 2013 joint review by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons, the Care Quality Commission and Healthcare Inspectorate Wales, an examination of 70 cases across seven police forces showed that the average time spent in police custody under section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) was 10 hours 32 minutes.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Section 136 of the MHA allows a person to be detained up to a maximum period of 72 hours in any place of safety. As the MHA Code of Practice (2008) states, irrespective of the 72 hour maximum time limit, any examination and interview or other steps must take place as soon as possible and the length of detention should not exceed the minimum required to enable this to happen.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Department of Health and the Home Office published a joint review of the operation of sections 135 and 136 of the MHA on 18 December:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/review-of-the-operation-of-sections-135-and-136-of-the-mental-health-act" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/review-of-the-operation-of-sections-135-and-136-of-the-mental-health-act</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Consideration was given to recommending the creation of a statutory minimum time period for the wait between assessment and transfer to hospital where that is the outcome. However, the review concluded that local agreements should set out a minimum standard for assessments including acceptable time frames.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The review did, nonetheless, recommend reducing the maximum length of detention under Sections 135 and 136 of the MHA to 24 hours from 72 hours, with the possibility of an extension if necessary. Next steps regarding the recommendations for legislative change are subject to the development of a timetable for implementation, a detailed impact assessment, and plans for implementation and future funding being agreed between partners.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p> answering member constituency North Norfolk answering member printed Norman Lamb question first answered 08/01/2015 15:58:05 answering member 1439 label Biography information for Norman Lamb
	tabling member	204 label Biography information for Paul Burstow

178534

	registered interest
	date	09/02/2015
	answering body	Department of Health
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Social Services: Veterans
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, for what reason war disablement pensions are not fully exempted from local authority means tests for social care while Armed Forces Compensation Scheme Guaranteed Income Payments are so exempted.
	tabling member constituency	Dudley North
	tabling member printed	Ian Austin
	uin	223791
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/02/2015 answer text <p>The two different schemes that are available to support veterans who have been injured in service were established to deliver different aims which is why they are treated differently under the current social care charging rules.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The War Pension Scheme was introduced after World War 1, before the introduction of the welfare state and provides a range of allowances in addition to the basic war disablement pension. Some of these allowances are designed to specifically pay for the ongoing care costs associated with an individual’s disability and these are paid at a preferential rate, meaning that a war pensioner does not have to use their basic War Disablement Pension to meet these costs or seek other benefits to cover them. The Armed Forces Compensation Scheme however was introduced in 2005 and operates differently. Regular payments under it are designed to provide a guaranteed income for the future and are therefore currently treated differently in assessing what a person can afford to contribute to the cost of their care.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Social care has never been free and people have always been asked to make a contribution based on what they can afford. However, we know that the current system for paying for care no longer reflects the needs of today’s society which is why we are in the process of introducing the biggest reforms in over 65 years.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Officials in the Department have been working closely with the Royal British Legion to assess how a disregard may be applied for the War Pension Scheme under the social care charging rules in future.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North Norfolk answering member printed Norman Lamb grouped question UIN 223818 question first answered 12/02/2015 14:46:07 answering member 1439 label Biography information for Norman Lamb
	tabling member	1511 label Biography information for Lord Austin of Dudley

225292

	registered interest
	date	04/03/2015
	answering body	Department of Health
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Social Services: Veterans
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, for what reason war pensions and payments made under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme are treated differently when assessing the contributions the claimant must make towards their social care; and if he will make a statement.
	tabling member constituency	Tewkesbury
	tabling member printed	Mr Laurence Robertson
	uin	226321
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/03/2015 answer text <p>We are in the process of introducing fundamental reforms to how we pay for care and support that will make the system fairer for everyone, including veterans. At the moment, someone who has the highest care needs may risk losing all they have to meet the cost of their care. These reforms will mean that, for the first time ever, everyone will be protected from the risk of catastrophic care costs. The proposals are currently out for consultation and can be found at:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.careact2016.dh.gov.uk/" target="_blank">www.careact2016.dh.gov.uk</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Personal injury compensation paid to veterans and civilians has always been fully disregarded provided the money is placed in a Trust. The War Pensions Scheme, which is available to those injured prior to April 2005, provides a range of allowances some of which were designed to pay for ongoing care costs and that is why these payments have been taken into account under the care and support charging rules. The Armed Forces Compensation Scheme, introduced for those injured from April 2005, operates differently. Officials in the Department of Health are working with the Royal British Legion to review this issue and assess how the rules could be aligned in future to ensure fair treatment of veterans under both of these schemes.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North Norfolk answering member printed Norman Lamb question first answered 09/03/2015 17:43:45 answering member 1439 label Biography information for Norman Lamb
	tabling member	253 label Biography information for Mr Laurence Robertson

62944

	registered interest
	date	19/06/2014
	answering body	Department of Health
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Prostate Cancer: Drugs
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, for what reasons NICE has not recommended the treatment of abiraterone for use on the NHS; if he will place in the Library all correspondence NICE has received on the issue from (a) patient groups and (b) clinicians; and if he will make a statement.
	tabling member constituency	Chelmsford
	tabling member printed	Mr Simon Burns
	uin	201499
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/06/2014 answer text <p>The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published technology appraisal guidance in June 2012 which recommends abiraterone (Zytiga) in its licensed indication for the treatment of castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer previously treated with a docetaxel-containing regimen, subject to a patient access scheme agreed between the Department and the drug's manufacturer.</p><p> </p><p>NICE is currently appraising abiraterone for the treatment of metastatic hormone relapsed prostate cancer not previously treated with chemotherapy and has not yet published final guidance for the National Health Service. We understand that NICE has recently consulted on its draft guidance for this indication, which can be found at:</p><p> </p><p>http://guidance.nice.org.uk/TAG/434/Consultation/Latest</p><p> </p><p>NHS commissioners are legally required to fund those treatments recommended by NICE in its technology appraisal guidance.</p><p> </p><p>In the absence of NICE technology appraisal guidance it is for the relevant NHS commissioner to make funding decisions based on an assessment of the available evidence. The NHS Constitution states that patients have the right to expect local decisions on the funding of drugs and treatments 'to be made rationally following a proper consideration of the evidence'.</p><p> </p><p>We understand that abiraterone as a first-line treatment is available through the Cancer Drugs Fund to NHS patients in England who could benefit from it.</p><p> </p><p>We are unable to provide copies of the correspondence requested in the time available and this information will be placed in the Library in due course.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North Norfolk answering member printed Norman Lamb question first answered 24/06/2014 14:09:43 answering member 1439 label Biography information for Norman Lamb
	tabling member	46 label Biography information for Sir Simon Burns

178520

	registered interest
	date	09/02/2015
	answering body	Department of Health
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Social Services: Veterans
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, for what reasons guidance on charging for social care for injured veterans differs depending on whether the injury was sustained before or after 5 April 2005.
	tabling member constituency	Arfon
	tabling member printed	Hywel Williams
	uin	223818
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/02/2015 answer text <p>The two different schemes that are available to support veterans who have been injured in service were established to deliver different aims which is why they are treated differently under the current social care charging rules.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The War Pension Scheme was introduced after World War 1, before the introduction of the welfare state and provides a range of allowances in addition to the basic war disablement pension. Some of these allowances are designed to specifically pay for the ongoing care costs associated with an individual’s disability and these are paid at a preferential rate, meaning that a war pensioner does not have to use their basic War Disablement Pension to meet these costs or seek other benefits to cover them. The Armed Forces Compensation Scheme however was introduced in 2005 and operates differently. Regular payments under it are designed to provide a guaranteed income for the future and are therefore currently treated differently in assessing what a person can afford to contribute to the cost of their care.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Social care has never been free and people have always been asked to make a contribution based on what they can afford. However, we know that the current system for paying for care no longer reflects the needs of today’s society which is why we are in the process of introducing the biggest reforms in over 65 years.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Officials in the Department have been working closely with the Royal British Legion to assess how a disregard may be applied for the War Pension Scheme under the social care charging rules in future.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North Norfolk answering member printed Norman Lamb grouped question UIN 223791 question first answered 12/02/2015 14:46:08 answering member 1439 label Biography information for Norman Lamb
	tabling member	1397 label Biography information for Hywel Williams

48832

	registered interest
	date	28/04/2014
	answering body	Department of Health
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, from what date the statutory duty of candour will be implemented; and if he will make a statement.
	tabling member constituency	Chatham and Aylesford
	tabling member printed	Tracey Crouch
	uin	196897
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/05/2014 answer text <p>We announced, in ‘Hard Truths' the Government's response to the Mid Staffordshire public inquiry, that “subject to Parliamentary approval from 2014 every organisation registered with the Care Quality Commission will be expected to meet a new duty of candour”.</p> answering member constituency North Norfolk answering member printed Norman Lamb question first answered 07/05/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1439 label Biography information for Norman Lamb
	tabling member	3950 label Biography information for Dame Tracey Crouch

66099

	registered interest
	date	07/07/2014
	answering body	Department of Health
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Haemolytic Uraemic Syndrome
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, further to his Answer of 19 June 2014, Official Report, column 278W, on haemolytic uraemic syndrome, when the next meeting of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's evaluation committee will take place; and how soon after that meeting he expects to place a copy of NHS England's response in the Library.
	tabling member constituency	Eddisbury
	tabling member printed	Mr Stephen O'Brien
	uin	204175
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 14/07/2014 answer text <p>The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has advised that the next meeting of its highly specialised technology evaluation committee will take place on 24 July 2014. If the committee agrees finaldraft recommendations on eculizumab for the treatment of atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome, NICE will aim to make them available in September in line with its interim process guide. NHS England's response will form part of the documentation published and a copy will be placed in the Library at this time.</p> answering member constituency North Norfolk answering member printed Norman Lamb question first answered 14/07/2014 14:59:33 answering member 1439 label Biography information for Norman Lamb
	tabling member	427 label Biography information for Mr Stephen O'Brien

225643

	registered interest
	date	06/03/2015
	answering body	Department of Health
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Health Services: Greater Manchester
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how NHS services of national and regional speciality located within Greater Manchester will sit in the planning, funding and scrutiny arrangements under the Government's proposed devolution deal.
	tabling member constituency	Denton and Reddish
	tabling member printed	Andrew Gwynne
	uin	226555
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/03/2015 answer text <p>NHS England and clinical commissioning groups, as statutory National Health Service organisations, will remain accountable for meeting the full range of their statutory duties, including their duties as to the management of their financial resources.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>NHS bodies will remain liable for the exercise of the functions given to them in legislation. Existing lines of accountability for those bodies will also remain, as will the responsibilities the Secretary of State has in relation to the health service.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The fundamental national policies, inspection regimes, guidance and regulations will continue to apply to Greater Manchester.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North Norfolk answering member printed Norman Lamb grouped question UIN 226556 226557 226559 226561 226563 226564 226565 question first answered 16/03/2015 17:16:40 answering member 1439 label Biography information for Norman Lamb
	tabling member	1506 label Biography information for Andrew Gwynne

177195

	registered interest
	date	02/02/2015
	answering body	Department of Health
	answering dept id	17
	answering dept short name	Health
	answering dept sort name	Health
	hansard heading	Mental Health Services
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how he plans to ensure that NHS England area teams follow Monitor's guidelines on local pricing for mental health services; and if he will make a statement.
	tabling member constituency	Liverpool, Wavertree
	tabling member printed	Luciana Berger
	uin	222902
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 05/02/2015 answer text <p>No assessment has been made of the impact of price adjustments within the National Tariff Payment System arrangements for 2014-15 on out of area placements in mental health services. Funding for mental health has increased by £302 million in 2014-15, a rise of 1.5% in cash terms, total mental health spending rose from £11.362 billion in 2013-14 with £11.664 billion planned in 2014-15.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Monitor and NHS England are jointly responsible for setting the National Tariff Payment System arrangements. Mental health services are paid for at locally agreed prices. Commissioners and providers should have regard for the principles and rules applied to the National Tariff Payment System including the price adjustments when agreeing local prices. However, they have the flexibility to develop alternative payment approaches where there is good reason to do so and if this is in the best interests of patients.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Most mental health services are commissioned locally by clinical commissioning groups, with NHS England commissioning specialised mental health services directly through area teams. In these instances, area teams negotiate financial agreements with their local providers.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Monitor is responsible for enforcing the national tariff rules, including those on local price-setting and can take action where local financial agreements for services paid for at local prices are not transparent or fair.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency North Norfolk answering member printed Norman Lamb grouped question UIN 222903 question first answered 05/02/2015 13:34:58 answering member 1439 label Biography information for Norman Lamb
	tabling member	4036 label Biography information for Luciana Berger