Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the public health impact of removing added nitrites from processed meats, including potential reductions in cancer incidence and pressures on NHS services.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
No specific assessment has been made of the public health impact of removing added nitrates and/or nitrites from processed meats. An assessment has been made of the health impact of nitrates/nitrites more generally.
Government advice on red and processed meat consumption is based on the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition’s (SACN) report Iron and Health, published in 2010. This report concluded that red and processed meat intake is probably associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. The report considered nitrates and nitrites, which are preservatives that are added to some processed meats, as one of the plausible mechanisms for this association, and it concluded that the data did not support this, and noted that although such preservatives are permitted in processed meats, not all processed meats will contain these.
Based on the SACN’s conclusions, the Government advises that adults who regularly consume more than 90 grams per day of red and processed meat reduce their consumption to no more than the population average of 70 grams per day. This recommendation is also consistent with advice from the European Food Safety Authority in relation to safe levels for nitrites and nitrates added to meat. Intakes of red and processed meat are monitored through the National Diet and Nutrition Survey.
All food additives used in food and drink in Great Britain have undergone a rigorous safety assessment before they were authorised.
Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, with regard to the report published on 21 May by the Sands and Tommy’s Joint Policy Unit, Saving Babies' Lives Progress Report 2025, what assessment they have made of the proposed future commitments to reduce the rates of (1) stillbirth, (2) neonatal death, and (3) preterm birth, by 2035.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is determined to make sure all women, babies, and families receive safe, personalised, and compassionate care, regardless of background, location, or ethnicity.
Whilst there has been good progress in reducing the rates of stillbirth and neonatal death, we know much more needs to be done. We are looking carefully at what comes beyond the National Maternity Safety Ambition to ensure that we take an evidence-based approach, ensuring any targets are backed by action, are women and baby-centered, and focused squarely on tackling inequalities. As part of this, we are currently taking into consideration the recommendations in Sands and Tommy’s Saving Babies’ Lives 2025 Report.
On 23 June we announced a National Independent Investigation into Maternity and Neonatal Services, which will look at areas where families have repeatedly experienced issues including accountability, leadership and culture, inequalities, listening to women, and how the system responds to failings in care, along with a new Maternity and Neonatal taskforce that will take forward the recommendations of the investigation. We also announced immediate action alongside this, including the development of a maternal care bundle which aims to reduce deaths and serious harm, and reduce inequalities in maternal mortality. The Health Mission and 10-Year Health Plan are also addressing the wider determinants of health and health inequalities.
While we know we need new action to go further, some good progress has been made. NHS England’s Three-Year Plan includes the rollout of version three of the Saving Babies Lives Care Bundle, which provides maternity units with guidance and interventions to reduce stillbirths, neonatal brain injury, neonatal death, and preterm birth. It also includes initiatives to reduce inequalities, such as initiatives that focus on reducing smoking in pregnancy. As of May 2025, 97% of maternity providers in England were on track to fully implement the latest version of this bundle.
Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, with regard to the report published on 21 May by the Sands and Tommy’s Joint Policy Unit, Saving Babies' Lives Progress Report 2025, what assessment they have made of inequalities in (1) pregnancy, and (2) baby loss, by (a) ethnicity, and (b) deprivation.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is determined to make sure all women, babies, and families receive safe, personalised, and compassionate care, regardless of background, location, or ethnicity.
Whilst there has been good progress in reducing the rates of stillbirth and neonatal death, we know much more needs to be done. We are looking carefully at what comes beyond the National Maternity Safety Ambition to ensure that we take an evidence-based approach, ensuring any targets are backed by action, are women and baby-centered, and focused squarely on tackling inequalities. As part of this, we are currently taking into consideration the recommendations in Sands and Tommy’s Saving Babies’ Lives 2025 Report.
On 23 June we announced a National Independent Investigation into Maternity and Neonatal Services, which will look at areas where families have repeatedly experienced issues including accountability, leadership and culture, inequalities, listening to women, and how the system responds to failings in care, along with a new Maternity and Neonatal taskforce that will take forward the recommendations of the investigation. We also announced immediate action alongside this, including the development of a maternal care bundle which aims to reduce deaths and serious harm, and reduce inequalities in maternal mortality. The Health Mission and 10-Year Health Plan are also addressing the wider determinants of health and health inequalities.
While we know we need new action to go further, some good progress has been made. NHS England’s Three-Year Plan includes the rollout of version three of the Saving Babies Lives Care Bundle, which provides maternity units with guidance and interventions to reduce stillbirths, neonatal brain injury, neonatal death, and preterm birth. It also includes initiatives to reduce inequalities, such as initiatives that focus on reducing smoking in pregnancy. As of May 2025, 97% of maternity providers in England were on track to fully implement the latest version of this bundle.
Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the report by the Sands and Tommy’s Joint Policy Unit, Saving Babies' Lives Progress Report 2025, published on 21 May.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is determined to make sure all women, babies, and families receive safe, personalised, and compassionate care, regardless of background, location, or ethnicity.
Whilst there has been good progress in reducing the rates of stillbirth and neonatal death, we know much more needs to be done. We are looking carefully at what comes beyond the National Maternity Safety Ambition to ensure that we take an evidence-based approach, ensuring any targets are backed by action, are women and baby-centered, and focused squarely on tackling inequalities. As part of this, we are currently taking into consideration the recommendations in Sands and Tommy’s Saving Babies’ Lives 2025 Report.
On 23 June we announced a National Independent Investigation into Maternity and Neonatal Services, which will look at areas where families have repeatedly experienced issues including accountability, leadership and culture, inequalities, listening to women, and how the system responds to failings in care, along with a new Maternity and Neonatal taskforce that will take forward the recommendations of the investigation. We also announced immediate action alongside this, including the development of a maternal care bundle which aims to reduce deaths and serious harm, and reduce inequalities in maternal mortality. The Health Mission and 10-Year Health Plan are also addressing the wider determinants of health and health inequalities.
While we know we need new action to go further, some good progress has been made. NHS England’s Three-Year Plan includes the rollout of version three of the Saving Babies Lives Care Bundle, which provides maternity units with guidance and interventions to reduce stillbirths, neonatal brain injury, neonatal death, and preterm birth. It also includes initiatives to reduce inequalities, such as initiatives that focus on reducing smoking in pregnancy. As of May 2025, 97% of maternity providers in England were on track to fully implement the latest version of this bundle.
Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they will make an assessment of the potential merits of extending the eligibility for the respiratory syncytial virus vaccination to include people aged over 80, clinical risk groups, and immunocompromised populations.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
During the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) meeting of 5 February 2025, the Department confirmed that any extension to the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccination programme, including to those aged 80 years old and above as well as other groups, would require an impact and cost effectiveness analysis.
Based on the burden data and the real-world studies, the JCVI considered that extending the programme required more evidence on the duration of protection, and how this might impact cost effectiveness.
The JCVI met again on 4 June 2025 and RSV was one of the agenda items discussed. Minutes of the JCVI’s meetings are usually published within six weeks, and are publicly available on the GOV.UK website, in an online only format.
The committee keeps all vaccine programmes under review and will continue to update its advice as new evidence emerges. The Department will consider any future JCVI advice on who should be offered an RSV immunisation.
Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the Food Standards Agency’s position on the use of added nitrites in processed meats; and whether they intend to review current UK food additive regulations in line with evolving EU standards
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government supports the stance of the Food Standards Agency (FSA), which is the regulator for food safety in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
The FSA considers that the existing levels of these approved food additives provide sufficient protection for consumers. The FSA is aware of the changes made by the European Union, but has no plans to alter the maximum levels currently in legislation, because they remain important preservatives in a range of foods. As with all food additives, they have undergone safety assessments before authorisation and have been subject to various reviews both at a national and international level.
The Government advises consumers to reduce overall meat consumption, both red meat and cured meats, as part of a healthy balanced diet.
Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Statement by Baroness Merron on 22 May (HLWS662), what are the reasons why brand advertising is not included in the scope of TV and online advertising restrictions for less healthy food or drink.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is committed to implementing advertising restrictions for less healthy food and drink on television and online, as part of its ambition to raise the healthiest generation of children ever.
The decision to exempt brand advertising from these restrictions was made following consultation, and was understood and agreed by Parliament during the passage of the Health and Care Bill.
The position of the Government has been consistent, and on 7 April we re-confirmed our view that brand advertising is not in scope of this policy, as the legislation only restricts adverts that could reasonably be considered to be for identifiable less healthy products.
Industry raised significant concerns in response to the Advertising Standards Authority’s (ASA) draft implementation guidance published for consultation in February. We are aware that many brands have prepared advertising campaigns in good faith ahead of the restrictions’ current coming into force date of 1 October 2025, and remain concerned about how these adverts will be affected by the ASA’s implementation guidance.
There were several meetings between ministers in the Department of Health and Social Care and the Department of Culture, Media and Sport. These discussions culminated in setting out a resolution in our statement of 22 May. We announced that the Government will explicitly exempt ‘brand advertising’ from the advertising restrictions. This is to avoid pigeon-holing brands as less healthy, and instead encouraging brands to reformulate their products and offer healthier options.
Providing this legal clarification on the policy’s intention will provide certainty to industry and will support businesses to invest in advertising with confidence, while ensuring that we deliver on our commitment and protect children from further exposure to junk food advertising and the lifelong harms of obesity.
Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what are the reasons why "legal clarification" on brand advertising was deemed necessary in the Written Statement by Baroness Merron on 22 May (HLWS662) and not in the Written Statement by Baroness Merron on 22 April (HLWS587).
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is committed to implementing advertising restrictions for less healthy food and drink on television and online, as part of its ambition to raise the healthiest generation of children ever.
The decision to exempt brand advertising from these restrictions was made following consultation, and was understood and agreed by Parliament during the passage of the Health and Care Bill.
The position of the Government has been consistent, and on 7 April we re-confirmed our view that brand advertising is not in scope of this policy, as the legislation only restricts adverts that could reasonably be considered to be for identifiable less healthy products.
Industry raised significant concerns in response to the Advertising Standards Authority’s (ASA) draft implementation guidance published for consultation in February. We are aware that many brands have prepared advertising campaigns in good faith ahead of the restrictions’ current coming into force date of 1 October 2025, and remain concerned about how these adverts will be affected by the ASA’s implementation guidance.
There were several meetings between ministers in the Department of Health and Social Care and the Department of Culture, Media and Sport. These discussions culminated in setting out a resolution in our statement of 22 May. We announced that the Government will explicitly exempt ‘brand advertising’ from the advertising restrictions. This is to avoid pigeon-holing brands as less healthy, and instead encouraging brands to reformulate their products and offer healthier options.
Providing this legal clarification on the policy’s intention will provide certainty to industry and will support businesses to invest in advertising with confidence, while ensuring that we deliver on our commitment and protect children from further exposure to junk food advertising and the lifelong harms of obesity.
Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Statement by Baroness Merron on 22 May (HLWS662), what discussions were held between the Department of Health and Social Care and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport regarding the decision to delay the legislation to regulate unhealthy food and drink advertisement on TV.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is committed to implementing advertising restrictions for less healthy food and drink on television and online, as part of its ambition to raise the healthiest generation of children ever.
The decision to exempt brand advertising from these restrictions was made following consultation, and was understood and agreed by Parliament during the passage of the Health and Care Bill.
The position of the Government has been consistent, and on 7 April we re-confirmed our view that brand advertising is not in scope of this policy, as the legislation only restricts adverts that could reasonably be considered to be for identifiable less healthy products.
Industry raised significant concerns in response to the Advertising Standards Authority’s (ASA) draft implementation guidance published for consultation in February. We are aware that many brands have prepared advertising campaigns in good faith ahead of the restrictions’ current coming into force date of 1 October 2025, and remain concerned about how these adverts will be affected by the ASA’s implementation guidance.
There were several meetings between ministers in the Department of Health and Social Care and the Department of Culture, Media and Sport. These discussions culminated in setting out a resolution in our statement of 22 May. We announced that the Government will explicitly exempt ‘brand advertising’ from the advertising restrictions. This is to avoid pigeon-holing brands as less healthy, and instead encouraging brands to reformulate their products and offer healthier options.
Providing this legal clarification on the policy’s intention will provide certainty to industry and will support businesses to invest in advertising with confidence, while ensuring that we deliver on our commitment and protect children from further exposure to junk food advertising and the lifelong harms of obesity.
Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they will include (1) creating alternative diagnostic pathways for people with signs and symptoms of cancer, and (2) expanding direct patient access to diagnostics, as part of the national cancer plan.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The National Cancer Plan will cover the entirety of the cancer pathway, from referral and diagnosis to treatment and ongoing care, as well as prevention, research, and innovation. It will seek to improve every aspect of cancer care, including improving diagnostic performance.
We are committed to transforming diagnostic services and will support the National Health Service to increase diagnostic capacity to meet the demand for diagnostic services through investment in new capacity, including magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography scanners.
Full roll out of non-specific symptom (NSS) pathways, designed to speed up the diagnosis of cancer, has been achieved across England. NSS pathways introduce a route to possible diagnosis for patients who display symptoms that could indicate cancer, but which do not align to specific cancers. The new non-specific pathway complements current cancer diagnostic pathways, as well as providing elements that can be applied to existing pathways.
Additionally, general practice (GP) direct access enables GPs to directly request diagnostic tests, including several imaging modalities, such as ultrasound, x-ray, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging, rather than first requiring a patient be referred to a specialist in an outpatient appointment. Performing diagnostic tests at this stage ensures that patients receive test results more quickly.