Asked by: Lord Wills (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of payments made by the NHS in each of the last three years to (1) Cerner, (2) Epic and (3) EMIS; and of the cost of the contractual commitments the NHS has entered into with them over the next 10 years.
Answered by Lord Markham - Shadow Minister (Science, Innovation and Technology)
Information for all National Health Service payments, including at local level, in each of the last three years to Cerner, EPIC and EMIS is not held centrally. Additionally, no overall estimate has been made for all NHS contractual commitments for the next 10 years with these companies. The NHS adheres to central Government transparency requirements when publishing contracts.
Asked by: Lord Wills (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what is their estimate for each of the past three years of their returns from retaining the proceeds of cashed-in Premium Bonds for up to six days before they are transferred to the holder’s bank account.
Answered by Baroness Vere of Norbiton
NS&I raises cost effective finance for government from the retail savings market. It does this through offering savings products to consumers, including Premium Bonds. Funds raised by NS&I from these products, including Premium Bonds, flow to the National Loans Fund (NLF). The NLF is the government’s main borrowing and lending account, and to this end, it undertakes borrowing (primarily by issuing gilts via the Debt Management Office) and uses proceeds and other central government surplus balances, including funds from NS&I’s Premium Bonds, to manage its cash needs day-to-day.
The Exchequer’s cash needs are managed on an aggregate basis, meaning funds raised from Premium Bonds are not held in a separate account and do not receive a separate rate of return (which in any case is determined by the market as the government is ultimately a price taker). Therefore, there is not a single rate of return on NS&I proceeds and it would not be possible to provide an estimate of returns from retaining the proceeds of Premium Bonds.
When a customer divests their holdings of Premium Bonds, these repayments are also funded via the NLF’s activities and are typically processed within three working days. However, in exceptional circumstances, such as Bank Holidays, this may take longer. This process allows HM Treasury to manage Exchequer cashflows in a cost effective manner.
Asked by: Lord Wills (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made, in each of the past five years, of the economic costs of the effects of post-operative cancer treatments.
Answered by Lord Markham - Shadow Minister (Science, Innovation and Technology)
The Department is working jointly with NHS England and Cancer Alliances to ensure every person receives personalised care and support from cancer diagnosis onwards, including post-treatment. As outlined in the NHS Long Term Plan for cancer, where appropriate, every person diagnosed with cancer will have access to personalised care, including needs assessment, a care plan and health and wellbeing information and support. After treatment, the person will move to a follow-up pathway that suits their needs, and ensures they can get rapid access to clinical support, where they are worried that their cancer may have recurred.
Post-operative cancer treatments encompass a wide variety of care, depending on the type and stage of cancer, the treatment the patient has had, and the patient’s needs. Follow-up care often includes regular check-ups, blood tests, scans, and procedures. It may also involve further treatments to deal with late and long-term side effects, including chemotherapy or radiotherapy to reduce the risk of cancer coming back. These highly individualised treatments have varying economic costs.
Asked by: Lord Wills (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the costs of the continuing delays by the Office of the Public Guardian in granting Lasting Powers of Attorney to (1) individuals seeking Lasting Powers of Attorney, and (2) taxpayers.
Answered by Lord Bellamy
The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) is facing high demand to register Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPA) applications, including overcoming a backlog created during the pandemic. OPG is advising customers that the processing time for LPA applications is currently up to 20 weeks, including the statutory four-week waiting period.
Delays in processing LPAs have not led to any increased fee for customers who make an LPA application. OPG aims to achieve 100% cost recovery every year. In 2018/19 and 2019/20, OPG achieved 100.7% cost recovery. If full cost recovery is not achieved, then OPG’s costs are underwritten by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). In the past few years full cost recovery has not been achieved, driven by low demand for LPAs during the pandemic. In 2020/21, MoJ provided £18.9m of taxpayer funds, and £9.16m in 2021/22. This financial position is improving and OPG is waiting for the audit to be concluded for financial year 2022/23, which will be published in due course in the OPG annual report.
The Government fully understands that delays in registering and dispatching LPA applications are frustrating for customers. To return to processing times achieved before the pandemic, extra staff have been hired, staff are working overtime and across multiple shift patterns, and process efficiencies have been introduced. The government is also supporting the Powers of Attorney Bill sponsored by Stephen Metcalfe MP. The Bill will enable modernisation of the process for making and registering an LPA, bringing in a new digital channel and improving the paper one. This will create a faster and simpler service for customers and make the system more resilient to future disruption.
Asked by: Lord Wills (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the reasons for the continuing delays by the Office of the Public Guardian in granting Lasting Powers of Attorney.
Answered by Lord Bellamy
The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) is facing high demand to register Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPA) applications, including overcoming a backlog created during the pandemic. OPG is advising customers that the processing time for LPA applications is currently up to 20 weeks, including the statutory four-week waiting period.
Delays in processing LPAs have not led to any increased fee for customers who make an LPA application. OPG aims to achieve 100% cost recovery every year. In 2018/19 and 2019/20, OPG achieved 100.7% cost recovery. If full cost recovery is not achieved, then OPG’s costs are underwritten by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). In the past few years full cost recovery has not been achieved, driven by low demand for LPAs during the pandemic. In 2020/21, MoJ provided £18.9m of taxpayer funds, and £9.16m in 2021/22. This financial position is improving and OPG is waiting for the audit to be concluded for financial year 2022/23, which will be published in due course in the OPG annual report.
The Government fully understands that delays in registering and dispatching LPA applications are frustrating for customers. To return to processing times achieved before the pandemic, extra staff have been hired, staff are working overtime and across multiple shift patterns, and process efficiencies have been introduced. The government is also supporting the Powers of Attorney Bill sponsored by Stephen Metcalfe MP. The Bill will enable modernisation of the process for making and registering an LPA, bringing in a new digital channel and improving the paper one. This will create a faster and simpler service for customers and make the system more resilient to future disruption.
Asked by: Lord Wills (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 9 March (HL6179), how many of the whistleblowing cases formally raised and investigated in each of the last three years fell into each of the following categories (or similar categories): (1) financial wrong-doing, (2) sexual misconduct, (3) national security, (4) misleading Parliament or the public, and (5) other.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Shadow Minister (Treasury)
CSHR commissions departments annually to provide an overview of cases investigated formally through their whistleblowing procedures.
Data is provided based on a number of categories set out in the Civil Service annual data return and so does not align directly with the categories set out in the question; financial wrongdoing, sexual misconduct, national security, misleading Parliament and other.
Please note the caveat that national security whistleblowing data is a matter for the United Kingdom Security & Vetting team and is therefore not captured in these summaries.
2019/2020 - 383 cases were formally raised and investigated in government departments, with the concern upheld in 33 cases. They fell into the following categories:
Breach of Civil Service code - 23
Breach of security / information policy - 23
Bullying and harassment - 4
Danger to environment/health and safety - 13
Deceiving/misleading Ministers, Parliament and others - 2
Discrimination - 11
Failure to comply with legal obligations - 22
Fraud - 148
Frustrating implementation of policy - 7
Influence by improper pressure/personal gain - 14
Misuse of official position - 39
Other/Blank - 77
2020/2021 - 245 cases were formally raised and investigated in government departments, with the concern upheld in 13 cases. They fell into the following categories:
Breach of Civil Service code - 14
Breach of security / information policy - 8
Bullying and harassment - 1
Danger to environment/health and safety - 44
Deceiving/misleading Ministers, Parliament and others - 4
Discrimination - 7
Failure to comply with legal obligations - 12
Fraud - 96
Frustrating implementation of policy - 9
Influence by improper pressure/personal gain - 6
Misuse of official position - 19
Other - 25
2021/2022 - 311 cases were formally raised and investigated in government departments, with the concern upheld in 30 cases. They fell into the following categories:
Breach of Civil Service code - 0
Breach of Security / information policy - 14
Bullying and harassment - 4
Danger to environment/health and safety - 23
Deceiving/misleading Ministers, Parliament and others - 13
Discrimination - 5
Failure to comply with legal obligations - 19
Fraud - 131
Frustrating implementation of policy - 4
Influence by improper pressure/personal gain -10
Misuse of official position - 38
Other - 50
Asked by: Lord Wills (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 9 March (HL6179), how many of the whistleblowing cases formally raised, investigated and upheld in each of the last three years fell into each of the following categories (or similar categories): (1) financial wrongdoing, (2) sexual misconduct, (3) national security, (4) misleading Parliament or the public, and (5) other.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Shadow Minister (Treasury)
CSHR commissions departments annually to provide an overview of cases investigated formally through their whistleblowing procedures.
Data is provided based on a number of categories set out in the Civil Service annual data return and so does not align directly with the categories set out in the question; financial wrongdoing, sexual misconduct, national security, misleading Parliament and other.
Please note the caveat that national security whistleblowing data is a matter for the United Kingdom Security & Vetting team and is therefore not captured in these summaries.
2019/2020 - 33 cases were formally raised, investigated and upheld in government departments, falling into the following categories:
Breach of Civil Service code - 3
Breach of security / information policy - 4
Bullying and harassment - 1
Danger to environment/health and safety - 1
Deceiving/misleading Ministers, Parliament and others - 0
Discrimination - 1
Failure to comply with legal obligations - 3
Fraud - 12
Frustrating implementation of policy -0
Influence by improper pressure/personal gain - 1
Misuse of official position - 0
Other/Blank - 7
2020/2021 - 13 cases were formally raised, investigated and upheld in government departments, falling into the following categories:
Breach of Civil Service code - 1
Breach of security / Information Policy - 0
Bullying and harassment - 0
Danger to environment/health and safety - 6
Deceiving/misleading Ministers, Parliament and others - 0
Discrimination - 1
Failure to comply with legal obligations - 0
Fraud - 1
Frustrating implementation of policy - 1
Influence by improper pressure/personal gain - 0
Misuse of official position - 1
Other - 2
2021/2022 - 30 cases were formally raised, investigated and upheld in government departments, falling into the following categories:
Breach of Civil Service code - 0
Breach of Security / Information Policy- 2
Bullying and harassment - 0
Danger to environment/health and safety - 3
Deceiving/misleading Ministers, Parliament and others - 3
Discrimination - 1
Failure to comply with legal obligations - 5
Fraud - 6
Frustrating implementation of policy - 1
Influence by improper pressure/personal gain -0
Misuse of official position - 4
Other - 5
Asked by: Lord Wills (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many government departments operate whistleblowing policies.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Shadow Minister (Treasury)
Government departments have delegated authority for Whistleblowing policies. However, all have confirmed they have policies in place which meet the standards that are set out centrally by Civil Service HR.
Asked by: Lord Wills (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many government department employees or subcontractors have made disclosures and/or allegations of wrongdoing in the last three years; and of those, (1) how many did so using a formal whistleblowing procedure, and (2) how many claims were (a) formally investigated, and (b) upheld.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Shadow Minister (Treasury)
We are made aware by departments annually, who also report on behalf of their agencies, of cases raised formally through whistleblowing procedures.
In 2019/20, 383 cases were formally raised and investigated in government departments. The concern was upheld in 33 cases.
In 2020/21, 245 cases were formally raised and investigated in government departments. The concern was upheld in 13 cases.
In 2021/22, 311 cases were formally raised and investigated in government departments. The concern was upheld in 30 cases.
We do not ask departments for reports of informal cases.
Asked by: Lord Wills (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the efficiency savings that could be achieved from a DVLA database of registered non-GB driving licences which could be accessed by employers.
Answered by Baroness Vere of Norbiton
The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency does not hold details of all non-GB driving licence holders and there are no plans for such a database to be created.