Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to develop a long-term strategy alongside medical professionals to ensure sustainable funding for obesity services, including prevention, behavioural and psychological programmes, and alongside clinical treatments.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The National Health Service and local government provide a range of obesity services, from universal prevention initiatives to targeted interventions, including behaviour change programmes, digital tools and apps, and specialist services for people living with severe obesity and related conditions. These services support individuals at every stage to achieve and maintain a healthier weight.
Commissioning and funding decisions for obesity services are made locally by local authorities and NHS organisations in line with assessed population needs and available budgets. The Department works with these partners and NHS England to provide national policy direction, to support effective and sustainable service models and to introduce digital behavioural programmes.
NHS England is supporting integrated care boards (ICBs) to deliver a phased roll‑out of tirzepatide for the treatment of obesity. They have provided funding and guidance to ICBs and established a national wraparound support service for patients receiving these treatments, covering diet, physical activity, and behaviour change.
As set out in our 10-Year Health Plan for England, we are taking decisive action on the obesity crisis, including restricting junk food advertising to children, and setting healthy sales reporting and targets for large food businesses.
Whilst we recognise that prevention will always be better than a cure, we also need to support those already living with obesity. We have committed to doubling the number of people able to access the NHS Digital Weight Management Programme and to expand access to the newest obesity medicines.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - 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 5 January (HL13176), what safeguards they plan to put in place to ensure that integrated care boards are subject to proper scrutiny, particularly in relation to the incorporation of patient engagement work into the commissioning of services.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Integrated care boards currently have a statutory duty in relation to public involvement and consultation and are subject to an annual assessment by NHS England of their functions.
The abolition of Healthwatch England and Local HealthWatch arrangements will require primary legislation and is subject to the will of Parliament.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of adjusting the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-effectiveness thresholds for highly specialised technology in line with the new single technology appraisal cost-effectiveness thresholds due to come into effect from April.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
We have reached a landmark agreement with the United States of America that secures a preferential tariff rate of 0% for all pharmaceuticals exports to the US for at least three years, and preferential terms for the United Kingdom’s medical technology exports, meaning no additional new tariffs on medical technology. This means that, unlike anywhere else in the world, life sciences companies exporting medicines from the UK to the US will face no tariffs to do so, protecting jobs and investment in the UK.
The agreement will see the National Health Service invest approximately 25% more in innovative treatments which will be achieved through an increase to the standard cost-effectiveness threshold that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) uses and a change to the way in which NICE values health benefits to better reflect societal preferences.
There are currently no plans to increase the cost‑effectiveness threshold for the highly specialised technologies (HST) programme. The HST programme already operates at a much higher threshold than standard NICE technology appraisals, reflecting the challenges of bringing treatments for very rare conditions to market, and NICE has been able to recommend nearly all the treatments that have been evaluated through the HST programme for NHS use.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (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 impact of increasing the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence highly specialised technology cost-effectiveness threshold on patient access to rare disease medicines.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
We have reached a landmark agreement with the United States of America that secures a preferential tariff rate of 0% for all pharmaceuticals exports to the US for at least three years, and preferential terms for the United Kingdom’s medical technology exports, meaning no additional new tariffs on medical technology. This means that, unlike anywhere else in the world, life sciences companies exporting medicines from the UK to the US will face no tariffs to do so, protecting jobs and investment in the UK.
The agreement will see the National Health Service invest approximately 25% more in innovative treatments which will be achieved through an increase to the standard cost-effectiveness threshold that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) uses and a change to the way in which NICE values health benefits to better reflect societal preferences.
There are currently no plans to increase the cost‑effectiveness threshold for the highly specialised technologies (HST) programme. The HST programme already operates at a much higher threshold than standard NICE technology appraisals, reflecting the challenges of bringing treatments for very rare conditions to market, and NICE has been able to recommend nearly all the treatments that have been evaluated through the HST programme for NHS use.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what their rationale is for increasing the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) cost-effectiveness thresholds for assessing new medicines to £25–30,000 per quality-adjusted life year; and whether they plan to apply the same proportionate increases to the NICE cost-effectiveness thresholds for highly specialised technologies.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
We have reached a landmark agreement with the United States of America that secures a preferential tariff rate of 0% for all pharmaceuticals exports to the US for at least three years, and preferential terms for the United Kingdom’s medical technology exports, meaning no additional new tariffs on medical technology. This means that, unlike anywhere else in the world, life sciences companies exporting medicines from the UK to the US will face no tariffs to do so, protecting jobs and investment in the UK.
The agreement will see the National Health Service invest approximately 25% more in innovative treatments which will be achieved through an increase to the standard cost-effectiveness threshold that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) uses and a change to the way in which NICE values health benefits to better reflect societal preferences.
There are currently no plans to increase the cost‑effectiveness threshold for the highly specialised technologies (HST) programme. The HST programme already operates at a much higher threshold than standard NICE technology appraisals, reflecting the challenges of bringing treatments for very rare conditions to market, and NICE has been able to recommend nearly all the treatments that have been evaluated through the HST programme for NHS use.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with Healthwatch England about making public comments regarding the Government's decision to transfer its current role to the proposed new patient experience directorate in the Department of Health and Social Care.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government has accepted the recommendations of Dr Penny Dash’s Review of patient safety across the health and care landscape and confirmed in its 10-Year Health Plan for England that the strategic functions of Healthwatch England will transfer to a new patient experience directorate within the Department. This change is intended to strengthen the role of patient voice by embedding it at the centre of a reformed Department.
The Department continues to engage with Healthwatch England as this work progresses. Discussions with Healthwatch England have not included the making of public comments about the transfer of Healthwatch England functions to the proposed patient experience directorate.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many planning appeals relating to grey belt land have been allowed in the past two years.
Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)
The Planning Inspectorate does not hold the requested information in a readily searchable way, and planning appeals do not have a marker for Grey Belt. As such, it is not possible to identify planning appeal decisions relating to grey belt in the past two years.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask His Majesty's Government what training programmes they are putting into place for local planning officers to ensure they understand the implications of the presumption in favour of sustainable development.
Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)
My Department funds the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) to provide specialist training, peer learning and guidance for local planning authorities, including on implementing planning reforms and the National Planning Policy Framework. During the 2025–26 financial year, we allocated approximately £2.8 million to PAS, and officials collaborate closely with PAS to turn policy objectives into practical support.
Furthermore, we are taking action to improve planning capacity and capability. At the Autumn Budget 2024, the Chancellor announced a £46 million package of investment into the planning system as a one-year settlement for 2025-2026.
At the Budget on 26 November 2025, the Chancellor announced a further £48 million of investment over three years to support local planning authorities to attract, retain and develop skilled planners over a sustained period.
Of this, £28.8 million has been allocated to MHCLG’s Planning Capacity and Capability Programme, equating to £9.6 million additional per year for the next three years. This allocation will supplement existing budgets.
In total, the Programme now aims to deliver around 1,325 planners by the end of this Parliament, significantly exceeding our original manifesto commitment to deliver 300 new planning officers. Wider cross-government recruitment and investment in planning capacity and capability will increase this figure further to approximately 1,400 planners.
The new funding will support both graduate and mid-career entry routes into planning, including by means of expanding the Pathways to Planning Graduate Scheme and establishing a Planning Careers Hub.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask His Majesty's Government what action they are taking to ensure that sanctions are taken against local planning authorities who either refuse applications for non-planning reasons or who do not apply a presumption in favour of sustainable development in the pre-application process.
Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)
The planning performance regime monitors local planning authorities on the speed and quality of their decisions. Quality is assessed by the proportion of decisions overturned at appeal, which can include refusals for non-planning reasons or failure to apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development.
If more than 10% of decisions are overturned, the Secretary of State may designate the authority for poor performance. Designation requires the authority to prepare an improvement plan, and applicants may choose to submit relevant applications directly to the Planning Inspectorate for determination.
Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask His Majesty's Government what evidential basis or analysis they hold to determine whether the prospect of a local planning authority incurring a cost award in a planning appeal is sufficient incentive to ensure local planning authorities appropriately apply the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework in regard to grey belt and the presumption in favour of sustainable development.
Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)
My Department has made no such assessment.
The award of costs regime exists to encourage good behaviour by all parties in the planning process. Costs may be awarded where a party has behaved unreasonably and has caused another party to incur unnecessary or wasted expense.
Planning decisions are required to be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Where local planning authorities have exercised their duty to determine planning applications in a reasonable manner, even if they are overturned at appeal, they should not normally be liable for an award of costs.