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 printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label attachment file name title
tabling member	label

Search

832849

registered interest
date	29/01/2018
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Medical Equipment: Pakistan
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they intend to require the NHS supply chain to be subject to the same transparency requirements as private companies under the Modern Slavery Act 2015, having regard to concerns raised over suppliers of medical instruments in Pakistan; and if not, why not.
tabling member printed	Lord Beecham
uin	HL5161
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/02/2018 answer text <p>DHL run the NHS Supply Chain operation and are subject to the transparency in supply chains requirements of the Modern Slavery Act 2015. Their Modern Slavery Statement, made pursuant to section 54(1) of the Modern Slavery Act 2015, for the financial year ended 31 December 2017 outlines DHL's policy and supplier code of conduct regarding modern slavery. A copy of the statement is attached.</p><p>In addition, DHL also provide specific information on how they are addressing the issue of modern slavery in the context of the NHS Supply Chain operation.</p><p>DHL applies a Supplier Code of Conduct which outlines their main principles for suppliers in the area of labour standards and worker welfare. All suppliers are expected to adhere to these principles which address issues including child labour, forced labour, wages, working hours and health and safety. The Supplier Code of Conduct is a contractual requirement and has been part of all NHS Supply Chain Framework Agreements since 2009. It is based on the principles of the United Nations Global Compact.</p><p>Suppliers have a responsibility to have appropriate systems in place to ensure that the principles of the Supplier Code of Conduct are upheld both within their own operations and those of their supply chain partners.</p><p>To provide a consistent basis for the way that suppliers manage labour standards within their supply chains, DHL requires suppliers of surgical instruments to implement and operate a Labour Standards Assurance System (LSAS) in line with a defined management system specification. Suppliers are contractually obligated to conduct independent third party audits on their LSAS annually as a minimum, and provide evidence that their systems meet the required standard to DHL.</p> answering member printed Lord O'Shaughnessy question first answered 08/02/2018 15:09:27 answering member 4545 label Biography information for Lord O'Shaughnessy attachment 1 file name Modern Slavery Statement.pdf title Modern Slavery Statement
tabling member	4181 label Biography information for Lord Beecham

832853

registered interest
date	29/01/2018
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Radiation: Medical Equipment
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that provision is made for the implementation of European technical and safety standards in relation to medical radiation equipment used in the UK post-Brexit and the UK’s withdrawal from Euratom.
tabling member printed	Lord Carlile of Berriew
uin	HL5165
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/02/2018 answer text <p>New legislation implementing European Union patient safety standards for medical exposures in the United Kingdom comes into force on 6 February 2018. These regulations ensure that individuals are protected when exposed to ionising radiation from medical equipment for imaging or treatment purposes and include provisions relating to quality assurance, testing and use of medical radiological equipment.</p><p>The Department is working on ensuring the best outcome for the health and social care system following the UK’s exit from the EU. All relevant teams within the Department and other relevant Government departments and agencies are involved with this work and assessing the implications of the UK leaving the EU on their area. The UK expects to continue to be at the forefront of international activities in radiation protection through its activities with the International Atomic Energy Agency.</p> answering member printed Lord O'Shaughnessy grouped question UIN HL5166 question first answered 07/02/2018 12:13:00 answering member 4545 label Biography information for Lord O'Shaughnessy
tabling member	1138 label Biography information for Lord Carlile of Berriew

832854

registered interest
date	29/01/2018
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Radiation: Medical Equipment
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that patients in the UK continue to receive, post-Brexit, radiological examinations and radiotherapy procedures using equipment that meets European standards of technical capability and safety.
tabling member printed	Lord Carlile of Berriew
uin	HL5166
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/02/2018 answer text <p>New legislation implementing European Union patient safety standards for medical exposures in the United Kingdom comes into force on 6 February 2018. These regulations ensure that individuals are protected when exposed to ionising radiation from medical equipment for imaging or treatment purposes and include provisions relating to quality assurance, testing and use of medical radiological equipment.</p><p>The Department is working on ensuring the best outcome for the health and social care system following the UK’s exit from the EU. All relevant teams within the Department and other relevant Government departments and agencies are involved with this work and assessing the implications of the UK leaving the EU on their area. The UK expects to continue to be at the forefront of international activities in radiation protection through its activities with the International Atomic Energy Agency.</p> answering member printed Lord O'Shaughnessy grouped question UIN HL5165 question first answered 07/02/2018 12:13:00 answering member 4545 label Biography information for Lord O'Shaughnessy
tabling member	1138 label Biography information for Lord Carlile of Berriew

832855

registered interest
date	29/01/2018
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Radioisotopes
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that (1) patients in the UK benefit from a continued supply of radiopharmaceuticals that meet the CE-marking for technical and safety standards, and (2) UK companies continue to be able to get their own items and equipment CE-marked and sold in Europe, post-Brexit and the UK’s withdrawal from Euratom.
tabling member printed	Lord Carlile of Berriew
uin	HL5167
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/02/2018 answer text <p>The safety and security of radioactive materials is a top priority for the Government. The United Kingdom already has robust domestic legislation in place to ensure that the keeping, movement and use of radioactive sources is tightly regulated, whether on nuclear sites or in hospitals. The UK’s regulatory regime is based on international regulatory requirements for sources informed by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The UK will continue to meet its international obligations in full and ensure that UK law and regulatory oversight continues to deliver the highest standards of safety, in line with the relevant international frameworks.</p><p>Radio pharmaceuticals are also subject to European medicines regulation which establishes a licensing regime and controls on the quality of materials, as well as manufacturing and distribution processes within Europe. In the UK, human medicines are subject to national human medicines legislation which transposes the requirements of the European regulatory regime. This regime is enforced by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and MHRA will continue to do so after our withdrawal from the European Union.</p><p>The Government's top priority for life sciences during the negotiations is to protect the safety of patients and ensure the integrity of cross-European public health systems. The Government will seek a mutually beneficial future partnership between the UK and EU that is in the interests of both sides, which builds on the convergence between our regulatory systems and gives business the maximum freedom to trade with and operate within European markets.</p><p><strong> </strong></p> answering member printed Lord O'Shaughnessy question first answered 07/02/2018 12:19:20 answering member 4545 label Biography information for Lord O'Shaughnessy
tabling member	1138 label Biography information for Lord Carlile of Berriew

832871

registered interest
date	29/01/2018
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Health Services: Foreign Nationals
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the stakeholder questions on the requirement for all relevant bodies to charge upfront for treatment, which are being asked as part of the review of the National Health Service (Charges to Overseas Visitors) (Amendment) Regulations 2017 (SI 2017/756), are designed to exclude evidence relating to the impact of charging upfront prior to those Regulations coming into force; whether the review will consider evidence submitted relating to that impact; and what assessment they have made of the extent to which it is possible for a stakeholder responding to provide evidence of the impact of the requirement to charge upfront without drawing on evidence of the impact of charging upfront before that new requirement came into effect.
tabling member printed	Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
uin	HL5188
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/02/2018 answer text <p>The current review was initiated as a response to concerns that have been raised by stakeholders regarding the introduction of the National Health Service (Charges to Overseas Visitors) (Amendment) Regulations 2017, the ‘amendment regulations 2017’, and in line with the continuing public sector equalities duty in relation to these regulations. A document outlining the scope of the review, to consider the impact of the amendment regulations 2017, was shared with stakeholders in November 2017. The questions which have been sent to stakeholders since the sharing of the scope document have intentionally focused on asking for evidence relating to the impact of the amendment regulations 2017. This is in accordance with the rationale for the review and the review scope, which had previously been communicated to stakeholders.</p><p>The Department is aware that, given that the amendment regulation, introduced as part of the amendment regulations 2017, requiring relevant bodies to withhold treatment from chargeable overseas visitors until the estimated full cost of the service has been paid, made a legal requirement of what was previously best practice, it may be relevant to refer to the effects of upfront charging prior to the amendment regulations 2017 coming into effect. This is acknowledged in the question documents which the Department has sent to stakeholders. For example, in the question document sent to vulnerable group’s representatives, the introduction asks for stakeholders to indicate whether the evidence they present relates to the period before or after the relevant provisions of the Amendment Regulations 2017 came into force. It is also the case that if, during the course of engaging with stakeholders as part of the review the Department were to receive evidence concerning the impact of upfront charging prior to the amendment regulations 2017 coming into force the Department would, of course, consider this evidence and take any resulting action which it judged to be necessary.</p> answering member printed Lord O'Shaughnessy question first answered 07/02/2018 12:17:41 answering member 4545 label Biography information for Lord O'Shaughnessy
tabling member	2024 label Biography information for Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

832873

registered interest
date	29/01/2018
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord O'Shaughnessy on 24 January (HL4671), what assessment they have made of the accuracy of the assertion by Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust that staff were consulted appropriately in October and November 2017 over plans to establish a wholly-owned company to run estates and other support services; and how it relates to the date on which the decision to establish the company was taken by the Board.
tabling member printed	Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
uin	HL5199
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/02/2018 answer text <p>On 25 January 2017, the Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust board approved work to examine the case for establishing a wholly owned subsidiary for estates and facilities management. On 20 December 2017, after staff consultation had taken place, the Trust board approved the formation of a wholly owned subsidiary.</p><p>NHS Improvement has reviewed key relevant documents including the Trust board paper evidencing informal staff engagement about the proposed changes during October 2017, as well as a formal 30-day staff consultation during November 2017. Following the staff consultation, the Trust made changes to its proposal which benefitted the staff transferring to the new company. The Trust has confirmed to NHS Improvement that it took legal advice in relation to its duty to consult staff on the changes.</p><p> </p><p>The Trust did not establish the wholly-owned subsidiary prior to consulting clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). NHS Improvement has seen correspondence from Somerset CCG on 19 December 2017 giving permission for the wholly-owned subsidiary to be a permitted subcontractor. NHS Improvement has seen similar correspondence from NHS England Specialised Commissioners on 22 November 2017 approving the wholly-owned subsidiary as a permitted subcontractor. The Trust board took the decision to approve the formation of the wholly owned subsidiary on 20 December 2017.</p><p>Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust has told NHS Improvement that it has not been necessary to spend additional time beyond normal Board business discussing clinical matters as a result of establishing a wholly-owned subsidiary company.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord O'Shaughnessy grouped question UIN HL5200 HL5201 HL5202 question first answered 08/02/2018 12:33:14 answering member 4545 label Biography information for Lord O'Shaughnessy
tabling member	2024 label Biography information for Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

832875

registered interest
date	29/01/2018
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord O'Shaughnessy on 24 January (HL4673), why the Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust established a wholly-owned subsidiary company prior to consulting Clinical Commissioning Groups locally about the proposal.
tabling member printed	Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
uin	HL5200
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/02/2018 answer text <p>On 25 January 2017, the Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust board approved work to examine the case for establishing a wholly owned subsidiary for estates and facilities management. On 20 December 2017, after staff consultation had taken place, the Trust board approved the formation of a wholly owned subsidiary.</p><p>NHS Improvement has reviewed key relevant documents including the Trust board paper evidencing informal staff engagement about the proposed changes during October 2017, as well as a formal 30-day staff consultation during November 2017. Following the staff consultation, the Trust made changes to its proposal which benefitted the staff transferring to the new company. The Trust has confirmed to NHS Improvement that it took legal advice in relation to its duty to consult staff on the changes.</p><p> </p><p>The Trust did not establish the wholly-owned subsidiary prior to consulting clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). NHS Improvement has seen correspondence from Somerset CCG on 19 December 2017 giving permission for the wholly-owned subsidiary to be a permitted subcontractor. NHS Improvement has seen similar correspondence from NHS England Specialised Commissioners on 22 November 2017 approving the wholly-owned subsidiary as a permitted subcontractor. The Trust board took the decision to approve the formation of the wholly owned subsidiary on 20 December 2017.</p><p>Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust has told NHS Improvement that it has not been necessary to spend additional time beyond normal Board business discussing clinical matters as a result of establishing a wholly-owned subsidiary company.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord O'Shaughnessy grouped question UIN HL5199 HL5201 HL5202 question first answered 08/02/2018 12:33:14 answering member 4545 label Biography information for Lord O'Shaughnessy
tabling member	2024 label Biography information for Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

832877

registered interest
date	29/01/2018
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord O'Shaughnessy on 24 January (HL4674), why no staff consultation took place prior to the decision of the Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust to establish a wholly-owned subsidiary company.
tabling member printed	Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
uin	HL5201
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/02/2018 answer text <p>On 25 January 2017, the Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust board approved work to examine the case for establishing a wholly owned subsidiary for estates and facilities management. On 20 December 2017, after staff consultation had taken place, the Trust board approved the formation of a wholly owned subsidiary.</p><p>NHS Improvement has reviewed key relevant documents including the Trust board paper evidencing informal staff engagement about the proposed changes during October 2017, as well as a formal 30-day staff consultation during November 2017. Following the staff consultation, the Trust made changes to its proposal which benefitted the staff transferring to the new company. The Trust has confirmed to NHS Improvement that it took legal advice in relation to its duty to consult staff on the changes.</p><p> </p><p>The Trust did not establish the wholly-owned subsidiary prior to consulting clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). NHS Improvement has seen correspondence from Somerset CCG on 19 December 2017 giving permission for the wholly-owned subsidiary to be a permitted subcontractor. NHS Improvement has seen similar correspondence from NHS England Specialised Commissioners on 22 November 2017 approving the wholly-owned subsidiary as a permitted subcontractor. The Trust board took the decision to approve the formation of the wholly owned subsidiary on 20 December 2017.</p><p>Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust has told NHS Improvement that it has not been necessary to spend additional time beyond normal Board business discussing clinical matters as a result of establishing a wholly-owned subsidiary company.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord O'Shaughnessy grouped question UIN HL5199 HL5200 HL5202 question first answered 08/02/2018 12:33:14 answering member 4545 label Biography information for Lord O'Shaughnessy
tabling member	2024 label Biography information for Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

832879

registered interest
date	29/01/2018
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate has been made of the additional time spent by the Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Board discussing clinical matters as a result of establishing a wholly-owned subsidiary company to run estates and other support services.
tabling member printed	Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
uin	HL5202
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/02/2018 answer text <p>On 25 January 2017, the Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust board approved work to examine the case for establishing a wholly owned subsidiary for estates and facilities management. On 20 December 2017, after staff consultation had taken place, the Trust board approved the formation of a wholly owned subsidiary.</p><p>NHS Improvement has reviewed key relevant documents including the Trust board paper evidencing informal staff engagement about the proposed changes during October 2017, as well as a formal 30-day staff consultation during November 2017. Following the staff consultation, the Trust made changes to its proposal which benefitted the staff transferring to the new company. The Trust has confirmed to NHS Improvement that it took legal advice in relation to its duty to consult staff on the changes.</p><p> </p><p>The Trust did not establish the wholly-owned subsidiary prior to consulting clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). NHS Improvement has seen correspondence from Somerset CCG on 19 December 2017 giving permission for the wholly-owned subsidiary to be a permitted subcontractor. NHS Improvement has seen similar correspondence from NHS England Specialised Commissioners on 22 November 2017 approving the wholly-owned subsidiary as a permitted subcontractor. The Trust board took the decision to approve the formation of the wholly owned subsidiary on 20 December 2017.</p><p>Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust has told NHS Improvement that it has not been necessary to spend additional time beyond normal Board business discussing clinical matters as a result of establishing a wholly-owned subsidiary company.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord O'Shaughnessy grouped question UIN HL5199 HL5200 HL5201 question first answered 08/02/2018 12:33:14 answering member 4545 label Biography information for Lord O'Shaughnessy
tabling member	2024 label Biography information for Lord Hunt of Kings Heath

832881

registered interest
date	29/01/2018
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Liothyronine
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the degree to which the analysis contained in the NHS England document Items which should not be routinely prescribed in primary care: Guidance for CCGs justifies the advice given that prescribers in primary care should not prescribe liothyronine (T3) for any new patients.
tabling member printed	Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
uin	HL5203
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/02/2018 answer text <p>In November 2017 NHS England published commissioning guidance for clinical commissioning groups, entitled <em>Items which should not be routinely prescribed in primary care: A Consultation on guidance for CCGs, </em>following a three month consultation. A joint clinical working group comprised of clinical representatives reviewed the consultation findings and made evidence-based recommendations for consideration by the NHS England Board. Liothyronine attracted a significant number of responses and following detailed review, significant amendments to the original proposals were made before being published in the finalised guidance. NHS England’s recommendations are that National Health Service consultant endocrinologists may still initiate and recommend liothyronine for new patients, following audited individual trial periods of use, as recommended by the British Thyroid Association.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord O'Shaughnessy question first answered 07/02/2018 12:11:38 answering member 4545 label Biography information for Lord O'Shaughnessy
tabling member	2024 label Biography information for Lord Hunt of Kings Heath