Asked by: Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to improve the recording of cases of iatrogenic, foodborne and other botulism in humans and domestic and wild animals; and what actions they are taking to support improved global data collection of botulism outbreaks.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) records all cases of botulism in humans, including iatrogenic and foodborne botulism. Foodborne, infant, and wound botulism are very rare. Iatrogenic botulism cases only emerged in England in 2025 and have not yet been included in routine reporting.
To support global data collection of botulism, outbreaks of botulism involving United Kingdom residents are published by Eurosurveillance, Europe's journal on infectious disease surveillance, epidemiology, prevention, and control.
Foodborne and infant botulism cases are also published within UKHSA’s annual Gastrointestinal infections and outbreaks in England reports, and wound botulism counts annually in the UKHSA’s Shooting Up: infections among people who inject drugs in the UK reports.
Botulism in animals is not notifiable.
Asked by: Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the need to incorporate standardised microbiome endpoints in the safety assessment of food additives; and what plans they have to ensure that food regulation reflects the cumulative effects of additive ultraprocessed food mixtures upon the public.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The development of standardised end points remains an important consideration across food regulatory regimes and is kept under review with input from the relevant scientific advisory committees. In 2024, the Committee on Toxicity held a workshop entitled Gut reactions: xenobiotics and the microbiome and published its report in June 2025.
The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has not started any work to develop regulatory changes specifically relating to ultra-processed foods. The FSA continues to monitor emerging evidence in this area and will take account of relevant developments, including the findings of the UK Research and Innovation public dialogue on ultra-processed foods, published in April 2026.
Asked by: Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Merron on 20 July (HL1965), what checks or actions they have taken to ensure that employers, system regulators and professionals are ensuring that physician assistants are not illegally acting as prescribers.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
If any concerns are raised that a registered physician assistant is illegally prescribing, those concerns should be referred to the General Medical Council for investigation, in the same way as any other potential breach of professional standards.
More broadly, National Health Service employers have a legal responsibility for ensuring that the staff they employ are properly trained and competent to undertake only those responsibilities specified in agreed job descriptions, and for managing medicines in line with Care Quality Commission regulations.
Asked by: Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that physician associates do not act as prescribers.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The law does not currently allow physician assistants (PAs), still legally known as physician associates, to prescribe.
The General Medical Council, which regulates PAs, states on its website that PAs cannot prescribe, even if they hold prescribing rights from a previous profession and have previously been authorised to prescribe in that role by their employer.
Employers and system regulators, alongside professionals, are responsible for ensuring that individuals do not work outside of their scope of practise.
Asked by: Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure the adoption across the NHS of the new name polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome (previously polycystic ovary syndrome) and what steps they are taking to improve medical professionals' knowledge of, and provision of treatment for, the condition.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government recognises the need to improve awareness of polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome (PMOS) and welcomes the renaming of this condition from polycystic ovary syndrome to PMOS, a change that reflects the multisystemic nature of the condition.
NHS England is in the process of reflecting the name change on the relevant National Health Service webpage for this condition, as well as updating the page to reflect current guidance. Going forward, NHS England will adopt the name change across all pathways, communications, and information, and will promote the revised approach and the new name across all its networks.
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has already adopted the new term for the guideline that it is developing on PMOS which is expected to be published in December this year, with the draft guideline published for consultation in July.
The Government also acknowledges the importance of ensuring healthcare professionals are adequately trained and educated on women’s health conditions, including PMOS, and we have taken action to address this.
The General Medical Council (GMC) has introduced the Medical Licensing Assessment to encourage a better understanding of common women’s health problems among all doctors as they start their careers in the United Kingdom. The content for this assessment includes several topics relating to women’s health, including PMOS.
Women's health is included the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) curriculum for trainee general practitioners (GPs), including PMOS.
The curriculum also covers the healthcare needs of women across all diseases seen in primary care, as it is important women are treated holistically. This ensures that all future GPs receive education on women’s health.
The RCGP has also published a Women’s Health Library which brings together educational resources and guidelines on women’s health from the RCGP, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, and the College of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare. This resource is continually updated to ensure GPs and other primary healthcare professionals have the most up-to-date advice to provide the best care for their patients.
Asked by: Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the implications of the Supreme Court's reversal of the Cheshire West judgment ([2014] UKSC 19), including whether existing checks and independent inspections of facilities will continue; and whether the right to a legal advocate will be maintained.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government remains firmly committed to safeguarding and protecting the rights of people lacking capacity.
The deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) system will continue to apply in line with changes required by the Supreme Court judgment. This includes the right to a legal advocate where appropriate. DoLS are only one of several protections in place. Additional safeguards include the Mental Capacity Act, local authority safeguarding duties required by the Care Act 2014, and common law duties of care, some of which also include the right to an advocate.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) undertakes independent oversight of these safeguards, including DoLS, and will continue to do so in light of the Supreme Court judgment. As part of their inspection regime, the CQC checks that care providers, including for-profit settings and providers, have effective systems to help keep adults safe from abuse and neglect.
Asked by: Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, in light of the Supreme Court's reversal of the Cheshire West judgment ([2014] UKSC 19), how they will ensure that patients are not damaged by closed care cultures, including where care is provided in for-profit settings or by for-profit providers.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government remains firmly committed to safeguarding and protecting the rights of people lacking capacity.
The deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) system will continue to apply in line with changes required by the Supreme Court judgment. This includes the right to a legal advocate where appropriate. DoLS are only one of several protections in place. Additional safeguards include the Mental Capacity Act, local authority safeguarding duties required by the Care Act 2014, and common law duties of care, some of which also include the right to an advocate.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) undertakes independent oversight of these safeguards, including DoLS, and will continue to do so in light of the Supreme Court judgment. As part of their inspection regime, the CQC checks that care providers, including for-profit settings and providers, have effective systems to help keep adults safe from abuse and neglect.
Asked by: Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what (1) financial support, and (2) other support, they are providing to support the (a) discovery, (b) development, and (c) delivery of new anti-fungal drugs.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
We recognise antimicrobial resistance (AMR), including resistance to fungal pathogens, is a significant and growing threat to public health. The Department supports research and innovation across the pipeline from discovery through to development and delivery of new antifungal treatments.
Through the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), the Department has invested substantially in AMR research, which includes antifungal innovation. Over the last five years, the NIHR has invested over ÂŁ88 million in AMR programme funding, supporting research to understand infections, optimise antimicrobial use, and develop new antimicrobials.
The Global AMR Innovation Fund has established a work package specifically to stimulate innovation and provide support for the development of products to combat fungal AMR via Fungal AMR Innovations for LMICs: Solutions and Access For Everyone (FAILSAFE), run by the Centre for Medical Mycology at the University of Exeter. FAILSAFE funds vital research and development in this space as well as providing training and capacity building and has established the world’s largest medical mycology network of over 1,100 members.
Beyond direct funding, the NIHR supports research infrastructure such as Biomedical Research Centres and Health Protection Research Units, and the United Kingdom’s 2024–2029 AMR National Action Plan prioritises the development of new treatments and their translation into practice.
Asked by: Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have, if any, to implement a national screening programme of children for exposure to lead (1) in general, or (2) in cases where there is a reason to suspect exposure; and what action they plan to take to identify and remove or seal off sources of lead contamination.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is advised on all screening matters by the UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC), an independent scientific advisory committee which is made up of leading medical and screening experts. Where the committee is confident that there is robust evidence that demonstrates that to offer screening provides more good than harm, they recommend a screening programme.
The UK NSC made a recommendation not to screen children for lead poisoning in 2018. This is because:
- the number of children affected in the United Kingdom is currently not known;
- the test was not reliable enough; and
- treatments in children with mild symptoms have not been proven and may also be harmful.
In 2024 a proposal was submitted to the UK NSC via its open call, to review the decision made in 2018 for screening children for lead poisoning. The UK NSC is planning to undertake an evidence map, which is the first step in the evidence review process.
The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) advises that exposure to lead should be as low as reasonably practicable. The UKHSA support partners in identifying the pathway and source of lead and advises on appropriate public health interventions to aid in reducing exposure. Interventions include interruption of lead exposure pathways by source identification and remediation or abatement, behavioural interventions, and consideration of whether others may be at risk of exposure. The UKHSA is also involved in raising awareness as many healthcare professionals are unaware that lead still poses a risk in the UK and elsewhere.
The remit of the UKHSA in relation to lead contamination is advisory and does not extend to undertaking any remedial measures.
Asked by: Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made, and what data they have collected, on the rate of the development of long covid among children and adults of working age.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The most recent data from the Winter COVID-19 Infection Study, a joint study carried out by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and the UK Health Security Agency, show that, for the period 6 February 2024 to 7 March 2024, an estimated 1,140,000 people, or 1.9% of the population, in private households in England and Scotland, reported experiencing long COVID symptoms more than twelve weeks after a COVID-19 infection. This includes 66,000 people aged three to 17 years old, and 840,000 people aged 18 to 64 years old.
Data for the four-week period ending 5 March 2023 from the Prevalence of ongoing symptoms following coronavirus (COVID-19) infection in the UK ONS dataset shows that the estimated number of people living in private households in the United Kingdom with self-reported long COVID who first had, or suspected they had, COVID-19 at least 12 weeks previously, was 1.7 million. This includes 59,000 people aged from two to 16 years old, and 1.5 million people aged 17 to 69 years old.
Data for the four-week period ending 5 March 2022 from the Prevalence of ongoing symptoms following coronavirus (COVID-19) infection in the UK ONS dataset shows that the estimated number of people living in UK private households with self-reported long COVID who first had, or suspected they had, COVID-19 at least 12 weeks previously, was 1.2 million. This includes 99,000 people aged from two to 16 years old, and one million people aged 17 to 69 years old.