Asked by: Lord Warner (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the expected combined impact on the size of the adult male prison population of the Sentencing Bill, the Criminal Justice Bill, and the Victims and Prisoners Bill.
Answered by Lord Bellamy
The Government is taking action to reform the justice system and reduce the pressure felt on our prison estate through measures introduced in the Criminal Justice Bill, Sentencing Bill, and the Victims and Prisoners Bill. This is to ensure we continue to have capacity to crack down on crime, reduce reoffending, and protect the public from the most dangerous offenders.
Publishing impact assessments is routine alongside the legislative process and the current estimates for the impact of the announced measures on the future population have been published and can be found on the gov.uk pages on each Bill. As the Bills progress through Parliament, if an update to these estimates and impact assessments are required, then these will be updated and republished during Bill progress.
Asked by: Lord Warner (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what proportion of NHS acute hospital trusts currently have average waiting times for elective surgery over six months; and what are the names of those trusts.
Answered by Lord Markham
18 out of the 135, or 13.3%, of National Health Service trusts in England currently have an average waiting time for elective surgery of over six months. This has been defined as those NHS trusts with a median wait time for patients with a decision to admit that is over 26 weeks. Due to the size of the data, a spreadsheet is attached which includes a table listing the average waiting time for NHS trusts in England.
Asked by: Lord Warner (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government when was the last year that the NHS in England achieved (1) its four-hour target for A&E waiting times, (2) its 62-day target for cancer treatment, and (3) an average waiting time for elective surgery under six months.
Answered by Lord Markham
The accident and emergency target and 62-day cancer treatment targets were last met at a national level in 2015. The average waiting time for elective surgery is currently under six months.
Asked by: Lord Warner (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what proportion of acute hospital trusts in England regularly conduct NHS operations on (1) Saturdays, and (2) Sundays; and whether this information is able to be published so that patients may exercise choice.
Answered by Lord Markham
The information requested is shown in the attached table. This is existing Hospital Episode Statistics data that is already published by NHS England.
Asked by: Lord Warner (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government what progress they have made with the establishment of pilot schemes to assess the feasibility of introducing a common identifier for children across health, care, and education services.
Answered by Baroness Barran
It has not proved possible to respond to this question in the time available before Prorogation. Ministers will correspond directly with the Member.
Asked by: Lord Warner (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to refer the Impact Assessment for the 2023 Statutory Scheme to control the cost of branded health services medicines to the Regulatory Policy Committee.
Answered by Lord Markham
There are no plans to refer the statutory scheme Impact Assessment to the Regulatory Policy Committee. The proposals only impact companies which choose to sell to the National Health Service and are therefore considered to be in connection with procurement. Given this, the statutory exclusion from the Better Regulation Framework “Procurement 22(4)(b)” applies as confirmed previously by the Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat at the Cabinet Office.
Asked by: Lord Warner (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the proposed update to the 2023 Statutory Scheme to control the cost of branded health services medicines, what policy options were included in the Department of Health and Social Care's long list as alternatives to the options that were included in the final consultation.
Answered by Lord Markham
The statutory scheme consultation sets out the options under consideration. We are in the process of analysing the responses provided, including consideration of any alternative options proposed, and will update on our preferred policy approach later this year. A copy of the impact assessment is attached.
Asked by: Lord Warner (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the proposed update to the 2023 Statutory Scheme to control the cost of branded health services medicines, what analysis and evidence the Department of Health and Social Care considered when it proposed to keep growth in the cost of branded medicines in real-terms decline, at 2 per cent a year.
Answered by Lord Markham
2% allowed growth per annum represents an 80% rise in allowed growth compared to the 1.1% per annum which applied in the statutory scheme from 2019 to 2023. The proposal is consistent with the approach that underpinned the current statutory scheme’s 1.1% allowed growth, i.e., it equals the average allowed growth of the preceding voluntary scheme.
The proposed allowed growth rate considered multiple factors including the overall fiscal path. Furthermore, consideration of the pipeline of upcoming new treatments featured within our forecast growth in spend on new treatments and, ultimately, continued growth forecast in medicine sales.
Controlling growth at this level is considered to allow for a viable overall envelope for the statutory scheme more favourable for industry compared to the existing statutory scheme arrangements, whilst continuing to ensure that spend on branded medicines is affordable to the National Health Service.
Asked by: Lord Warner (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Proposed update to the 2023 Statutory Scheme to control the cost of branded medicines, whether the 2 per cent cap in growth in the cost of branded medicines was assessed against (1) inflation expectations, and (2) demographic pressures.
Answered by Lord Markham
2% allowed growth per annum represents an 80% rise in allowed growth compared to the 1.1% per annum which applied in the statutory scheme from 2019 to 2023. The proposal is consistent with the approach that underpinned the current statutory scheme’s 1.1% allowed growth, i.e., it equals the average allowed growth of the preceding voluntary scheme.
The proposed allowed growth rate considered multiple factors including the overall fiscal path. Furthermore, consideration of the pipeline of upcoming new treatments featured within our forecast growth in spend on new treatments and, ultimately, continued growth forecast in medicine sales.
Controlling growth at this level is considered to allow for a viable overall envelope for the statutory scheme more favourable for industry compared to the existing statutory scheme arrangements, whilst continuing to ensure that spend on branded medicines is affordable to the National Health Service.
Asked by: Lord Warner (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to introduce an end of scheme reconciliation exercise for the Statutory Scheme to control the cost of branded health services medicines.
Answered by Lord Markham
No end of scheme reconciliation exercise was proposed in the recent consultation on updating the statutory scheme. We are in the process of considering consultation responses.