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

222990

registered interest
date	23/02/2015
answering body	Department of Health
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health
answering dept sort name	Health
hansard heading	NHS: Finance
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether the specialised services circular issued by NHS England on 30 September 2013, ID SSC1315, on Individual Funding Requests for Clinically Urgent Treatment Outside Established Policy, remains in force; whether individual requests for treatments for which a cohort policy is in development will not be funded without evidence of clinical exceptionality; how many individual funding requests for (a) all treatment and (b) Duodopa were (i) approved and (ii) not approved under the (A) critical clinically urgent criteria and (B) urgent non-clinical criteria in each month in which that circular has been in force; if all requests made under the urgent non-clinical criteria received expert opinion from the Chair of the relevant clinical reference group within two weeks; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Sutton and Cheam
tabling member printed	Paul Burstow
uin	224981
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/03/2015 answer text <p>NHS England has confirmed that, to be successful, any individual funding request (IFR) for Duodopa must demonstrate exceptionality against the cohort of patients with Parkinson's disease in NHS England’s draft commissioning policy.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Although it does not routinely commission Duodopa for the treatment of advanced Parkinson’s disease, NHS England has advised that, it will consider funding this treatment in exceptional clinical circumstances. Clinicians can submit IFRs for this treatment to NHS England on behalf of their patients.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>NHS England has IFRs for all treatments/interventions were received by NHS England through the standard IFR process. 238 of these were considered by an NHS England IFR panel.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>21 requests for Duodopa were received as shown in the table.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>IFR team</p></td><td><p>Indication</p></td><td><p>Number of IFRs received</p></td><td><p>Approved</p></td><td><p>Not Approved</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Midlands and East</p></td><td><p>Duodopa</p></td><td><p>3</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>North</p></td><td><p>Duodopa</p></td><td><p>5</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>London</p></td><td><p>Duodopa</p></td><td><p>11</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>11</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>South</p></td><td><p>Duodopa</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>2</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p><em>Source:</em> NHS England</p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p>NHS England is unable to provide monthly figures due to the small volume of requests as this could lead to the identification of individual patients.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>NHS England has advised that the SSC1315 on Individual Funding Requests for Clinically Urgent Treatment Outside Established Policy has officially expired but has been maintained whilst a review is taking place regarding how such cases will be handled in the future.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>It has confirmed that not all non-clinical IFRs require an expert opinion. This is only sought when it is felt that further expert opinion is required. It should be noted that Duodopa became NHS England’s responsibility from April 2014. Prior to then cases were considered by clinical commissioning groups.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Details of IFRs processed under specialised services circular SSC1315 for the period 1 October 2013 to 24 February 2015 are shown in the table:</p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2"><p>IFR team</p></td><td rowspan="2"><p>Indication</p></td><td rowspan="2"><p>Number of IFRs received</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>Approved</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>Not Approved</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>critical clinically urgent</p></td><td><p>urgent non-clinical</p></td><td><p>critical clinically urgent</p></td><td><p>urgent non-clinical</p></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2"><p>Midlands &amp; East</p></td><td><p>All</p></td><td><p>11</p></td><td><p>5</p></td><td><p>6</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Duodopa</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2"><p>North</p></td><td><p>All</p></td><td><p>13</p></td><td><p>12</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Duodopa</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2"><p>London</p></td><td><p>All</p></td><td><p>37</p></td><td><p>31</p></td><td><p>3</p></td><td><p>3</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Duodopa</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2"><p>South</p></td><td><p>All</p></td><td><p>18</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>3</p></td><td><p>4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Duodopa</p></td><td><p>6</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p><em>Source:</em> NHS England</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Further information about NHS England’s IFR process is available at:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/cp-03.pdf" target="_blank">www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/cp-03.pdf</a></p><p> </p> answering member constituency Mid Norfolk answering member printed George Freeman grouped question UIN 224942 224946 question first answered 02/03/2015 17:40:04 answering member 4020 label Biography information for George Freeman
tabling member	204 label Biography information for Paul Burstow

222997

registered interest
date	23/02/2015
answering body	Department of Health
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health
answering dept sort name	Health
hansard heading	Clinical Priorities Advisory Group
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether NHS England is continuing to consider whether to publish the minutes of meetings of the Clinical Priorities Advisory Group; what factors it is taking into consideration before making that decision; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Sutton and Cheam
tabling member printed	Paul Burstow
uin	224943
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/03/2015 answer text <p>NHS England has advised that it is planning to publish the Clinical Priorities Advisory Group (CPAG) minutes for the meeting which took place in February. It plans to publish these minutes and others following the current NHS England consultation on the principles underpinning prioritisation in specialised services. The consultation closes on 27 April 2015 and can be found at:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.engage.england.nhs.uk/consultation/investing-in-specialised-commissioning" target="_blank">www.engage.england.nhs.uk/consultation/investing-in-specialised-commissioning</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>NHS England has advised that it intends to routinely publish minutes of CPAG meetings in the future, and is considering how to make available minutes of previous meetings.</p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p> answering member constituency Battersea answering member printed Jane Ellison question first answered 02/03/2015 17:42:49 answering member 3918 label Biography information for Jane Ellison
tabling member	204 label Biography information for Paul Burstow

223001

registered interest
date	23/02/2015
answering body	Department of Health
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health
answering dept sort name	Health
hansard heading	Levodopa
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, on what basis NHS England's Clinical Priorities Advisory Group has recommended that Duodopa should not be routinely commissioned by NHS England; what factors NHS England's Clinical Priorities Advisory Group took into consideration in reaching that recommendation; what advice NHS England's Clinical Priorities Advisory Group sought from patient representatives in reaching that decision; what process NHS England follows to allow interested parties to appeal recommendations by the Clinical Priorities Advisory Group; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Sutton and Cheam
tabling member printed	Paul Burstow
uin	224941
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/03/2015 answer text <p>NHS England has advised that its Neuroscience Clinical Reference Group (CRG) carefully reviewed the clinical evidence for the treatment of advanced Parkinson’s disease with Duodopa (co-careldopa) and made a recommendation to the Clinical Priorities Advisory Group (CPAG).</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>CPAG accepted the CRG’s recommendation that Duodopa should not be routinely commissioned for treatment of this condition and, in turn, made this recommendation to the Directly Commissioned Services Committee of the NHS England Board. The Board committee endorsed the recommendation in June 2014.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Both patients and carers were involved in the decision-making process. There are four patient /carer representatives on the CRG, and patient and public stakeholders registered with the CRG were given an opportunity to feed in their views before the Group made its recommendations to CPAG. CPAG’s membership includes a lay chair and four patient representatives.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Further work has been undertaken on Duodopa since NHS England’s Board endorsed CPAG’s decision in June 2014 and NHS England will reconsider whether or not to commission this treatment, alongside a number of other specialised treatments, later this year.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Mid Norfolk answering member printed George Freeman question first answered 02/03/2015 17:47:01 answering member 4020 label Biography information for George Freeman
tabling member	204 label Biography information for Paul Burstow

223004

registered interest
date	23/02/2015
answering body	Department of Health
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health
answering dept sort name	Health
hansard heading	NHS: Finance
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will request that NHS England review its policy on individual funding requests.
tabling member constituency	Sutton and Cheam
tabling member printed	Paul Burstow
uin	224949
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/03/2015 answer text <p>We have no such plans. We understand that NHS England is currently reviewing its generic policies, including its interim commissioning policy on individual funding requests.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Mid Norfolk answering member printed George Freeman question first answered 02/03/2015 17:45:14 answering member 4020 label Biography information for George Freeman
tabling member	204 label Biography information for Paul Burstow

173665

registered interest
date	14/01/2015
answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
answering dept id	26
answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
hansard heading	Social Services: Pay
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, with reference to the contribution of 13 January 2015 by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, Official Report, columns 218-22WH, on care sector, what discussions his Department has had with the Department for Communities and Local Government and the Department of Health on the effect of commissioning decisions by local authorities on the level of compliance with the national minimum wage in the care sector; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Sutton and Cheam
tabling member printed	Paul Burstow
uin	220728
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/01/2015 answer text <p>The Government is taking action to improve compliance with the National Minimum Wage (NMW) in the social care sector. We are working closely with the Department of Health, Communities and Local Government and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC).</p><p> </p><p>Over the period 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2013, HMRC have made enquiries into 224 employers in the social care sector. Over half of these were paying less than the minimum wage between them owing £1,319 729 arrears of pay to 6550 workers, with penalties issued with a total value of £146,931. There are 94 investigations currently underway in the social care sector.</p><p> </p><p>The Department of Health have recently published statutory guidance for local authorities as part of the package of secondary legislation to accompany the Care Act. The chapter of statutory guidance on commissioning and market shaping explicitly states that local authorities should have evidence that contract terms, conditions and fee levels will not compromise care providers’ ability to pay at least minimum wages.</p><p> </p><p>The Department of Health is asking all Local Authorities to sign up to the Social Care Commitment which incorporates a statement about employer compliance with minimum wage legislation. The Association of Directors of Adult Social Services has written out to all its members encouraging them to support the Commitment as a way of raising standards in adult social care.</p><p> </p><p>The Department of Health is also working with the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS), the Local Government Association (LGA) and the Health Services Management Centre at Birmingham University to develop as set of Commissioning Standards. Local authorities will be encouraged to use these as a benchmark to support them to improve commissioning practices, including those which have an impact on the social care workforce such as employer compliance with National Minimum Wage.</p><p> </p><p>In addition to the actions we are currently taking to reduce non-compliance in the social care sector, we will also be:</p><p> </p><p>• issuing guidance to employers so that they understand the NMW law, including tips to avoid common mistakes and the records that they should be keeping to prove that they are paying their workers correctly.</p><p> </p><p>• encouraging care sector workers who have been underpaid to make a complaint- making sure that they understand their entitlement.</p><p> </p><p>HMRC have started work on new targeted enforcement work in the care sector.</p><p> </p><p>Any worker who is concerned that they have not received what they are entitled to should call the helpline on 0800 917 2368. HMRC follow up every complaint.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency East Dunbartonshire answering member printed Jo Swinson question first answered 19/01/2015 15:37:41 answering member 1513 label Biography information for Jo Swinson
tabling member	204 label Biography information for Paul Burstow

173666

registered interest
date	14/01/2015
answering body	HM Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Social Services: Pay
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the contribution of 13 January 2015 by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, Official Report, column 222WH, on care sector, on what date each of the 94 cases was first raised with HM Revenue and Customs; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Sutton and Cheam
tabling member printed	Paul Burstow
uin	220729
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 30/01/2015 answer text <p>The Government takes the enforcement of the National Minimum Wage (NMW) very seriously and has increased the financial penalty percentage from 50% to 100% of the unpaid wages owed to workers, and the maximum penalty from £5,000 to £20,000. These new limits are now in force where arrears are identified in pay reference periods on or after 7 March 2014. The Government is in the process of introducing primary legislation so that the maximum £20,000 penalty will apply to each underpaid worker.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In response to the questions arising from the contribution of 13 January 2015 by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, Official Report, columns 218- 222WH, on the care sector:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Investigations into the 94 cases have been underway since 29 December 2011 – largely stemming from the particular period of enforcement referred to by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>HMRC already accept third party complaints and review all information received. All information received from third parties is handled sensitively. HMRC are unable to give feedback to third parties on any action taken or progress made, as all worker information is strictly confidential.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>HMRC’s proactive work informing the ‘National Minimum Wage: Compliance in the social care sector’ report, commenced in April 2011 and evaluated enforcement in the social care sector over the period 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2013. We are continuing to evaluate this work, and HMRC are undertaking new targeted enforcement work in the care sector as set out by the BIS Minister on 15 January 2015.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency South West Hertfordshire answering member printed Mr David Gauke grouped question UIN 220730 220731 question first answered 30/01/2015 13:53:09 answering member 1529 label Biography information for Mr David Gauke
tabling member	204 label Biography information for Paul Burstow

173667

registered interest
date	14/01/2015
answering body	HM Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Social Services: Pay
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the contribution of 13 January 2015 by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, Official Report, columns 218-22WH, on care sector, if he will make it his policy to enable third parties to make formal complaints about breaches of national minimum wage rules and for them to be kept informed of the progress and outcome of investigations; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Sutton and Cheam
tabling member printed	Paul Burstow
uin	220730
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 30/01/2015 answer text <p>The Government takes the enforcement of the National Minimum Wage (NMW) very seriously and has increased the financial penalty percentage from 50% to 100% of the unpaid wages owed to workers, and the maximum penalty from £5,000 to £20,000. These new limits are now in force where arrears are identified in pay reference periods on or after 7 March 2014. The Government is in the process of introducing primary legislation so that the maximum £20,000 penalty will apply to each underpaid worker.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In response to the questions arising from the contribution of 13 January 2015 by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, Official Report, columns 218- 222WH, on the care sector:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Investigations into the 94 cases have been underway since 29 December 2011 – largely stemming from the particular period of enforcement referred to by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>HMRC already accept third party complaints and review all information received. All information received from third parties is handled sensitively. HMRC are unable to give feedback to third parties on any action taken or progress made, as all worker information is strictly confidential.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>HMRC’s proactive work informing the ‘National Minimum Wage: Compliance in the social care sector’ report, commenced in April 2011 and evaluated enforcement in the social care sector over the period 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2013. We are continuing to evaluate this work, and HMRC are undertaking new targeted enforcement work in the care sector as set out by the BIS Minister on 15 January 2015.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency South West Hertfordshire answering member printed Mr David Gauke grouped question UIN 220729 220731 question first answered 30/01/2015 13:53:09 answering member 1529 label Biography information for Mr David Gauke
tabling member	204 label Biography information for Paul Burstow

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