Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what information his Department holds on the number and proportion of children who are not up-to-date with their vaccinations by the demographic characteristics of those children.

Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) monitors trends in the level of childhood vaccination rates by upper tier local authority, region and country level. Data on coverage of all routine childhood immunisations are published quarterly and annually by UKHSA. Quarterly data are available at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/cover-of-vaccination-evaluated-rapidly-cover-programme-2024-to-2025-quarterly-data

Annual data are available at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/cover-of-vaccination-evaluated-rapidly-cover-programme-annual-reports.

Data by demographic characteristics is not collected.

In England, the UK Health Security Agency is working closely with NHS England, the Department and wider health system partners at the national regional and local levels to improve uptake of the routine childhood immunisations and catch-up children who missed out.

To raise awareness of potential vaccination benefits and increase awareness of the programmes amongst health professionals, parents, carers and the wider public, UKHSA provides a comprehensive suite of public facing resources and assets, including information leaflets in multiple languages and accessible formats, including easy read, British Sign Language and braille. UKHSA also provides comprehensive clinical guidance including e-learning programmes and training for healthcare professionals. These are available at the following link:

https://find-public-health-resources.service.gov.uk/

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many and what proportion of people aged between 75 and 79 have received the respiratory syncytial virus vaccine.

Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) measures the coverage of vaccines against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).

The RSV adult vaccination programme in England began on 1 September 2024. Only data for the catch-up cohort, namely adults aged between 75 and 79 years old before the programme start date, has been published. The latest data is available at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rsv-older-adults-vaccination-coverage-in-england/rsv-vaccine-coverage-report-in-older-adults-for-catch-up-cohorts-in-england-july-2025

As of 31 July 2025, the overall vaccine coverage in the catch-up cohort reached 63.4%.

All adults turning 75 years old on or after 1 September 2024 will be eligible for the routine programme and should be offered a single dose of the RSV vaccine. A one-off catch-up campaign for those already aged between 75 and 79 years old on 1 September 2024 will be undertaken at the earliest opportunity.

The total number of individuals who have received an RSV vaccine is available from NHS England at the following link:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/vaccinations-rsv/

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what estimate he has made of the potential impact of the introduction of the respiratory syncytial virus vaccine for people aged between 75 and 79 on the number (a) deaths, (b) hospital admissions and (c) GP appointments.

Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The UK Health Security Agency’s (UKHSA) analysis in the Lancet journal in April indicated 30% fewer respiratory syncytial virus hospital admissions in 75- to 79-year-olds than would have occurred without vaccination. This was seen after around 40% of eligible older people had taken up their vaccination and uptake has since increased.

The full analysis is available at the following link:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(25)00346-0/fulltext.

At the June 2025 meeting of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, UKHSA presented new estimates of averted deaths and admissions in those aged 75 to 79 years. This was based on enhanced hospital surveillance and conservative estimates of vaccine waning over three seasons.

They estimate:

• 112.8 admissions prevented per 100,000 doses [around 890 vaccines prevents one admission]
• 8.6 deaths prevented per 100,000 doses [around 11,600 vaccines prevents one death]
• Before the vaccine roll-out, predictive analysis suggested that with high uptake, the 75–79-year-olds programme could prevent 17,000 GP attendances.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of co-locating (a) inhalers, (b) adrenaline auto injectors and (c) other emergency medical treatment alongside defibrillators in the community settings.

Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

There are no plans to make prescription inhalers available to store alongside automatic external defibrillators (AEDs). This is because AED guardians would need to maintain a stock of inhalers, as the devices need to be replaced when they are used. AED guardians would need to check regularly to see if a device had been used and returned, which is not feasible with non-dosage counter inhalers, or used and taken away by whoever needed it. Additionally, where AED cabinets are kept unlocked by their communities, there is a risk that small devices like inhalers could simply be stolen.

Individuals with asthma who have been prescribed inhalers, should have those devices with them or with their parent/guardian.

The National Health Service is also seeking to reduce prescribing of reliever inhalers and making these devices available through AED cabinets runs contrary to that goal.

Similarly, there are no plans to make adrenaline auto injectors or other prescription only treatments available for storage in AED cabinets.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will make an assessment of the reasons for which females who have an out of hospital cardiac arrest are less likely to receive (a) resuscitation and (b) defibrillation than males.

Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

Immediate resuscitation and defibrillation can substantially improve the chance of survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. While fewer than one in ten people survive an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, defibrillation within three to five minutes of collapse can produce survival rates of up to between 50% and 70%.

The Department and NHS England currently have no plans to make a specific assessment. However, NHS England has provided funding to St John Ambulance, who published research in October 2024 suggesting “a third of Brits are afraid to give CPR to a woman because they are worried about touching breasts”. The Department welcomes this research and their associated CPR Bra Campaign to tackle gender disparity in cardiopulmonary resuscitation, with more information on the campaign available at the following link:

https://www.sja.org.uk/press-centre/press-releases/St-John-launches-CPRbra-campaign-to-tackle-gender-disparity-in-cpr/

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what proportion of defibrillators have a collocated bleed/trauma pack.

Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Department does not hold data on the proportion of automatic external defibrillators (AEDs) that have a collocated bleed/trauma pack. AED databases, such as the Circuit, are operated independently of Government. It is a matter for the individual AED guardian and their local community to decide if they wish to keep a bleed/trauma pack in the cabinet with their AED.

Question to the Ministry of Defence:

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will place in the Library his Department's response to the freedom of information request, reference FOI2025/17106.

Answered by Luke Pollard - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)

I can confirm I am content to place a copy of my response in the library of the House.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that the abolition of NHS England does not affect the delivery of frontline services for patients.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Our commitment to the delivery of frontline services for patients underpin our reforms. These reforms will simplify the National Health Service, remove layers of unnecessary bureaucracy, and allow us to reinvest more in the frontline, so patients receive safe, timely care and are heard and listened to.

It is only right that with such significant reform, we commit to carefully assessing and understanding the potential impacts, and we will do this throughout. Ongoing assessment is part of the reform programme and evidence collected will inform the programme as appropriate and ensure our decisions focus on improving patient care. The Government is committed to transparency and will consider how best to ensure the public and parliamentarians are informed of the outcomes.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, when he plans to publish the estimate of the potential savings to the public purse following the abolition of NHS England.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Creating a new joint organisation will streamline decision-making, reduce bureaucracy, and improve accountability. These changes are expected to generate significant efficiencies over time.

The Department’s initial modelling demonstrates that the up-front investment in organisational change will be offset by long-term reductions in staffing and running costs, ensuring the programme delivers value for money and sustainable savings for the taxpayer.

Further detailed planning work is underway, considering all the funding priorities for the Department and NHS England. Further detail will be provided once this work has concluded.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether his Department has made an estimate of the value for money of paying NHS trusts to validate the data on their waiting lists.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

No estimate has been made of the return on investment on the validation sprint.

Waiting list validation is a well-established component for effective management of waiting lists, with detailed guidance available for Trusts, including safeguards to ensure patients are not incorrectly removed from waiting lists.

The Department publishes the Referral to Treatment Rules Suite and NHS England has published two key guidance documents to support the recording and reporting patient pathways, including a set of FAQs. NHS England published an updated version of the guidance documents in February 2025. The guidance states there “must be agreement from a clinician before any patient is returned to the referrer.” Any patient removed should receive a letter that would also be sent to their GP.

Operational Planning Guidance 2025/26 set the requirement for trusts to validate patients on a referral to treatment (RTT) waiting list after 12 weeks and then every 12 weeks in line with good practice and published guidance, maximising the use of digital tools for both patient contact and data quality.

Effective waiting list validation ensures trusts have an accurate understanding of the true size of their waiting list, which in turn helps them to reduce missed or cancelled appointments, make the most effective use of clinicians’ time and reduce overall waiting times.

The Department does not hold data centrally on the number of incomplete pathways removed as a result of data validation on a monthly basis. As part of the validation sprint over the period from week ending 13 April 2025 to week ending 22 June 2025, waiting list management information across all acute providers estimates there were around 250,000 additional removals from waiting lists compared to the same period last year.

Routinely validated, accurate waiting lists are a necessary part of delivering on our commitment to return to the NHS Constitutional standard that 92% of patients wait no longer than 18 weeks from referral to treatment, and to help to improve experience for patients, so that clinical time can be focused on the patients who need it.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many incomplete pathways have been removed as a result of data validation in each month since July 2024.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

No estimate has been made of the return on investment on the validation sprint.

Waiting list validation is a well-established component for effective management of waiting lists, with detailed guidance available for Trusts, including safeguards to ensure patients are not incorrectly removed from waiting lists.

The Department publishes the Referral to Treatment Rules Suite and NHS England has published two key guidance documents to support the recording and reporting patient pathways, including a set of FAQs. NHS England published an updated version of the guidance documents in February 2025. The guidance states there “must be agreement from a clinician before any patient is returned to the referrer.” Any patient removed should receive a letter that would also be sent to their GP.

Operational Planning Guidance 2025/26 set the requirement for trusts to validate patients on a referral to treatment (RTT) waiting list after 12 weeks and then every 12 weeks in line with good practice and published guidance, maximising the use of digital tools for both patient contact and data quality.

Effective waiting list validation ensures trusts have an accurate understanding of the true size of their waiting list, which in turn helps them to reduce missed or cancelled appointments, make the most effective use of clinicians’ time and reduce overall waiting times.

The Department does not hold data centrally on the number of incomplete pathways removed as a result of data validation on a monthly basis. As part of the validation sprint over the period from week ending 13 April 2025 to week ending 22 June 2025, waiting list management information across all acute providers estimates there were around 250,000 additional removals from waiting lists compared to the same period last year.

Routinely validated, accurate waiting lists are a necessary part of delivering on our commitment to return to the NHS Constitutional standard that 92% of patients wait no longer than 18 weeks from referral to treatment, and to help to improve experience for patients, so that clinical time can be focused on the patients who need it.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many incomplete pathways have been removed as a result of data validation sprint in each month since April 2025.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

No estimate has been made of the return on investment on the validation sprint.

Waiting list validation is a well-established component for effective management of waiting lists, with detailed guidance available for Trusts, including safeguards to ensure patients are not incorrectly removed from waiting lists.

The Department publishes the Referral to Treatment Rules Suite and NHS England has published two key guidance documents to support the recording and reporting patient pathways, including a set of FAQs. NHS England published an updated version of the guidance documents in February 2025. The guidance states there “must be agreement from a clinician before any patient is returned to the referrer.” Any patient removed should receive a letter that would also be sent to their GP.

Operational Planning Guidance 2025/26 set the requirement for trusts to validate patients on a referral to treatment (RTT) waiting list after 12 weeks and then every 12 weeks in line with good practice and published guidance, maximising the use of digital tools for both patient contact and data quality.

Effective waiting list validation ensures trusts have an accurate understanding of the true size of their waiting list, which in turn helps them to reduce missed or cancelled appointments, make the most effective use of clinicians’ time and reduce overall waiting times.

The Department does not hold data centrally on the number of incomplete pathways removed as a result of data validation on a monthly basis. As part of the validation sprint over the period from week ending 13 April 2025 to week ending 22 June 2025, waiting list management information across all acute providers estimates there were around 250,000 additional removals from waiting lists compared to the same period last year.

Routinely validated, accurate waiting lists are a necessary part of delivering on our commitment to return to the NHS Constitutional standard that 92% of patients wait no longer than 18 weeks from referral to treatment, and to help to improve experience for patients, so that clinical time can be focused on the patients who need it.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what guidance he has issued to (a) NHS England and (b) NHS Trusts to validate their waiting list data.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

No estimate has been made of the return on investment on the validation sprint.

Waiting list validation is a well-established component for effective management of waiting lists, with detailed guidance available for Trusts, including safeguards to ensure patients are not incorrectly removed from waiting lists.

The Department publishes the Referral to Treatment Rules Suite and NHS England has published two key guidance documents to support the recording and reporting patient pathways, including a set of FAQs. NHS England published an updated version of the guidance documents in February 2025. The guidance states there “must be agreement from a clinician before any patient is returned to the referrer.” Any patient removed should receive a letter that would also be sent to their GP.

Operational Planning Guidance 2025/26 set the requirement for trusts to validate patients on a referral to treatment (RTT) waiting list after 12 weeks and then every 12 weeks in line with good practice and published guidance, maximising the use of digital tools for both patient contact and data quality.

Effective waiting list validation ensures trusts have an accurate understanding of the true size of their waiting list, which in turn helps them to reduce missed or cancelled appointments, make the most effective use of clinicians’ time and reduce overall waiting times.

The Department does not hold data centrally on the number of incomplete pathways removed as a result of data validation on a monthly basis. As part of the validation sprint over the period from week ending 13 April 2025 to week ending 22 June 2025, waiting list management information across all acute providers estimates there were around 250,000 additional removals from waiting lists compared to the same period last year.

Routinely validated, accurate waiting lists are a necessary part of delivering on our commitment to return to the NHS Constitutional standard that 92% of patients wait no longer than 18 weeks from referral to treatment, and to help to improve experience for patients, so that clinical time can be focused on the patients who need it.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of headcount reductions in (a) NHS England, (b) his Department and (c) Integrated Care Boards on the implementation of the 10 Year Health Plan.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Following the announcement that NHS England will be abolished as an arm’s length body and replaced by a new Department of Health and Social Care, a transformation programme has been launched, led by Richard Barker as Senior Responsible Officer.

It is only right that with such significant reform, we commit to carefully assessing and understanding the potential impacts, including headcount reductions in NHS England and the Department, as is due process. Evidence from these ongoing assessments will inform our programme as appropriate.

To support future planning, NHS England has published the Model ICB Blueprint, which sets out the strategic role of integrated care boards (ICBs). Their responsibilities will continue to focus on population health management, including understanding local needs, developing long-term strategies, allocating resources, and evaluating impact.

The new Department will operate in a leaner, more agile and more efficient way and empower staff at all levels of the health system to deliver better care for patients, drive productivity up and get waiting times down. This change will set local National Health Service providers free to innovate, develop new productive ways of working, and focus on what matters most.

The Government is committed to transparency and will consider how best to ensure the public and parliamentarians are informed of the outcomes.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the abolition of NHS England on local clinical services.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Following the announcement that NHS England will be abolished as an arm’s length body and replaced by a new Department of Health and Social Care, a transformation programme has been launched, led by Richard Barker as Senior Responsible Officer.

It is only right that with such significant reform, we commit to carefully assessing and understanding the potential impacts, as is due process. Evidence from these ongoing assessments will inform our programme as appropriate.

The new Department will operate in a leaner, more agile and more efficient way and empower staff at all levels of the health system, including local clinical systems, to deliver better care for patients, drive productivity up and get waiting times down. This change will set local National Health Service providers free to innovate, develop new productive ways of working, and focus on what matters most.

The Government is committed to transparency and will consider how best to ensure the public and parliamentarians are informed of the outcomes.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to the Answer of 23 July 2025 to Question 66246 on General Practitioners: Recruitment, what the minimum length would be of that significant period.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

The 10-Year Health Plan set out that we will work across Government to prioritise United Kingdom medical graduates for foundation training, and to prioritise UK medical graduates and other doctors who have worked in the National Health Service for a significant period for specialty training. We will set out further details in due course.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the closure of NHS England on levels of NHS service provision, in the context of (a) the closure of the NHS and Care Volunteer Responders programme and (b) and reductions in levels of availability of hyperbaric chamber services.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Volunteers play an important role supporting and complementing National Health Service services, staff, and patients but they do not replace staff or services. Following the closure of the NHS Volunteer Responders programme, all volunteers have been signposted to other NHS and voluntary sector organisations to continue their volunteering. Referrers were informed of the change in service provided so that they can source alternative support for their patients if needed. In addition, there are over 70,000 volunteers who continue to support NHS trusts directly in over 300 different volunteer roles, as well as many local voluntary sector organisations that provide other forms of support.

NHS England is committed to ensuring equitably accessible, high-quality services, for anyone who requires Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBOT). This will be achieved through the commissioning of six geographically dispersed services across England. The geographical scope of these services will ensure that there are no more than four hours travelling time by road from coastal locations, furthest borders or between neighbouring commissioned HBOT centres. This is in line with good practice guidelines.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the proposed abolition of NHS England on the (a) recruitment and (b) training of NHS staff.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Over the next two years, NHS England, including its functions for workforce, training, and education, will be brought into the Department. This will reduce duplication and bureaucracy, with savings from unnecessary administration costs allowing us to put more resources back into the front line and empower National Health Service staff to deliver better care for patients.

It is only right that with such significant reform, we commit to carefully assessing and understanding the potential impacts, as is due process. These ongoing assessments will inform our programme as appropriate.

Later this year, we will publish a 10 Year Workforce Plan to create a workforce ready to deliver a transformed service. They will be more empowered, more flexible, and more fulfilled. The 10 Year Workforce Plan will ensure the NHS has the right people in the right places, with the right skills to deliver the best care for patients, when they need it.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the abolition of NHS England on (a) NHS Digital Services and (b) the (i) storage and (ii) retention of patient data.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The merger of NHS England into the Department will not prevent us continuing to deliver the digital services on which the National Health Service relies, maintaining the highest standards of cyber security and ensuring patient data continues to be appropriately and safely stored. Legislation will make provision as necessary, with Parliament’s approval, to transfer the statutory responsibilities of NHS England to the Department.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, when he plans to confirm the cost of the redundancy package for staff being made redundant from (a) NHS England and (b) his Department.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Following the Prime Minister’s announcement of the abolition of NHS England, we are clear on the need for a smaller centre, as well as scaling back integrated care board running costs and National Health Service provider corporate cost reductions to reduce waste and bureaucracy.

Good progress is being made, with the Department and NHS England having announced voluntary exit and expressions of interest schemes respectively.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the abolition of NHS England on patient safety.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The changes that the Government is making, alongside the wider commitments set out in the 10 Year Health Plan, will positively impact on patient care and safety by driving quality of care, productivity and innovation in the National Health Service.

NHS England will continue to undertake its statutory functions while working with the new executive during the transition, until parliamentary time allows for changes to be made in primary legislation.

Patient safety will remain paramount over this transformation period. We will put plans in place to ensure continuity of care and that there are no risks to patient safety.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, when he plans to respond to the recommendations of the Hughes report on Options for redress for those harmed by valproate and pelvic mesh, published on 7 February 2024.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Government is carefully considering the work by the Patient Safety Commissioner and her Report, which set out options for redress for those harmed by valproate and pelvic mesh. This is a complex issue involving input from different government departments. The Government will provide a further update to the Patient Safety Commissioner’s Report.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many (a) women of child bearing age, (b) girls, (c) boys and (d) men are receiving prescriptions for sodium valproate as of 11 September 2025.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

Prescription data is collected by the NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA).

The NHSBSA bases prescription data on processed prescription data for each three-month period. This is a commonly used method for presenting prescription data for prescriptions given for chronic conditions that can last longer than one month.

The latest available prescription data is from the period between April and June 2025.

The following information is extracted from the NHSBSA ePACT2 database, using British National Formulary chemical substance sodium valproate (0408010W0) and valproic acid (0402030Q0, 040801020), prescribed in England. The following numbers of patients were prescribed one or more item between April 2025 and June 2025:

(a) 16,400 females aged 18-54

(b) 2,400 females aged 0-17

(c) 6,000 males aged 0-17

(d) 91,800 males aged 18 or over

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he plans to make interim payments to people affected by sodium valproate as recommended in the Hughes report on Options for redress for those harmed by valproate and pelvic mesh, published on 7 February 2024.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Government is carefully considering the work by the Patient Safety Commissioner and her Report, which set out options for redress for those harmed by valproate and pelvic mesh, including around interim payments. This is a complex issue involving input from different government departments. The Government will provide a further update to the Patient Safety Commissioner’s Report.

Found: Brackenridge (Labour; Wolverhampton North East) Sir James Cleverly (Conservative; Braintree) Dr Caroline Johnson

Found: Brackenridge (Labour; Wolverhampton North East) Sir James Cleverly (Conservative; Braintree) Dr Caroline Johnson

Found: Brackenridge (Labour; Wolverhampton North East) Sir James Cleverly (Conservative; Braintree) Dr Caroline Johnson

Found: Education Committee members present: Helen Hayes (Chair); Jess Asato; Mrs Sureena Brackenridge; Dr Caroline Johnson

Found: Education Committee members present: Helen Hayes (Chair); Jess Asato; Mrs Sureena Brackenridge; Dr Caroline Johnson

Found: Education Committee members present: Helen Hayes (Chair); Jess Asato; Mrs Sureena Brackenridge; Dr Caroline Johnson

Found: Education Committee members present: Helen Hayes (Chair); Jess Asato; Mrs Sureena Brackenridge; Dr Caroline Johnson