(2 days, 3 hours ago)
Lords ChamberTo ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to reduce reported delays in holding funerals because of changes in the provision of death certificates.
My Lords, the death certification reforms are increasing scrutiny of deaths and patient safety, and supporting the bereaved. We are taking steps to reduce the time to register a death, through active monitoring of the reforms, using weekly data from the ONS to target the challenges and the necessary support. We are also working with faith groups and the funeral sector to identify and reduce any obstacles, and sharing any concerns we receive with NHS England so that they can be swiftly resolved.
I thank my noble friend for that Answer. When my dad died—incidentally, he was born 100 years ago today—it was possible to arrange his funeral in two weeks. That is not now possible. I have talked to the National Association of Funeral Directors, and I understand that there is a lot of confusion around the country about the new procedures, although everyone understands why they are there. Is there more that could be done in hospitals or by GPs to help families who are having to cope with the unfamiliarity of the new procedures at the time of their own grief? More widely, might it be possible for the Government to start considering regulating the funeral profession, as has happened in Scotland?
I am sure that we all wish to pay tribute to the memory of my noble friend’s late father. I appreciate the points that he has made. It is not the case that delays to funerals can be identified and formally linked with the changes in death certification. My noble friend raised a lot of points, many of which are valid. In a bereavement, it is more important than ever that any official processes—as well as the funeral sector itself—work as seamlessly and sensitively as possible. I assure my noble friend that not only are we driving improvement by implementing the death registration reforms but we are very focused on supporting the bereaved. On my noble friend’s point about regulation, I am not aware of any plans at present.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberAs we move towards the 10-year plan, it will be key. Research, the contribution of life sciences and innovation will help us deliver an NHS that is fit for the future. I agree with the noble Baroness about the major contribution that is made to the UK economy. This is not just about healthcare, important though that is; it is also about growth. There are some 6,800 businesses generating more than £100 billion in turnover. Life sciences is one of the most dynamic and significant sectors. It drives economic growth, but it also provides a future in terms of the quality, availability and efficiency of the healthcare that we can provide in this country.
My Lords, I hope the House will understand me when I say that I deeply regret the fact that my noble friend has had to ask this Question in the first place. The cuts to which it refers have been described as an apocalypse for American science, but that is a matter for them. What do the Government think the consequences might be of the United States’ withdrawal from the World Health Organization? And does the Minister not agree that, in the event of an emerging global health threat, we will be less well placed to deal with it, to contain it and to understand what may be done without the United States in the World Health Organization? Are the Government already beginning to plan for this very sad eventuality?
My noble friend has made the point which I would emphasise: withdrawal from the World Health Organization is a matter for the United States to decide. The UK, however, will continue to work with all international partners and the WHO. It is a key factor in ensuring we have a healthier and safer world because disease does not respect borders. The UK Health Security Agency is carefully considering the impact of proposed changes in the United States, including its proposed withdrawal from the World Health Organization.