David Davis

As part of our mission for clean power we will unleash a UK solar rooftop revolution, alongside accelerating energy efficiency improvements of the existing housing stock. Rooftop solar on new homes and buildings will, where appropriate, play an important role in the drive for solar, delivering cleaner energy and lower bills to millions of households and businesses. Future standards next year will set our new homes and buildings on a path that moves away from relying on volatile fossil fuels and ensures they are fit for a net zero future.

Central government departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) have been working to draft Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard (ATRS) records since this became mandatory earlier this year. Publication plans were disrupted by the general election, but multiple records are expected to be published soon.

Since the introduction of a mandatory requirement for use of ATRS in cross-government policy, we have seen a significant acceleration in progress towards adopting it, which will be reflected soon in published records. As such, we do not believe that legislation is necessary at this time. We will continue to explore further options for encouraging and enforcing the use of the ATRS, and the need to extend the breadth of the policy beyond central government.

In the UK’s data protection framework, Article 22 of the UK GDPR sets out the rules relating to solely automated decisions that have legal or similarly significant effects on individuals. Under these circumstances, individuals have the right to specific safeguards, including being notified of the decisions, being provided information about the solely automated decision making that has been carried out, and the right to contest those decisions and to obtain human intervention.

These specific safeguards for solely automated decision making complement the wider data protection framework’s existing data subject rights, including the rights to transparency, objection and access. Organisations must also continue to observe the data protection principles to ensure personal data is processed lawfully, fairly and transparently. These rules apply to all organisations, including public bodies.

Central government departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) have been working to draft Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard (ATRS) records since this became mandatory earlier this year. Publication plans were disrupted by the general election, but multiple records are expected to be published soon.

Since the introduction of a mandatory requirement for use of ATRS in cross-government policy, we have seen a significant acceleration in progress towards adopting it, which will be reflected soon in published records. As such, we do not believe that legislation is necessary at this time. We will continue to explore further options for encouraging and enforcing the use of the ATRS, and the need to extend the breadth of the policy beyond central government.

In the UK’s data protection framework, Article 22 of the UK GDPR sets out the rules relating to solely automated decisions that have legal or similarly significant effects on individuals. Under these circumstances, individuals have the right to specific safeguards, including being notified of the decisions, being provided information about the solely automated decision making that has been carried out, and the right to contest those decisions and to obtain human intervention.

These specific safeguards for solely automated decision making complement the wider data protection framework’s existing data subject rights, including the rights to transparency, objection and access. Organisations must also continue to observe the data protection principles to ensure personal data is processed lawfully, fairly and transparently. These rules apply to all organisations, including public bodies.

Central government departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) have been working to draft Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard (ATRS) records since this became mandatory earlier this year. Publication plans were disrupted by the general election, but multiple records are expected to be published soon.

Since the introduction of a mandatory requirement for use of ATRS in cross-government policy, we have seen a significant acceleration in progress towards adopting it, which will be reflected soon in published records. As such, we do not believe that legislation is necessary at this time. We will continue to explore further options for encouraging and enforcing the use of the ATRS, and the need to extend the breadth of the policy beyond central government.

In the UK’s data protection framework, Article 22 of the UK GDPR sets out the rules relating to solely automated decisions that have legal or similarly significant effects on individuals. Under these circumstances, individuals have the right to specific safeguards, including being notified of the decisions, being provided information about the solely automated decision making that has been carried out, and the right to contest those decisions and to obtain human intervention.

These specific safeguards for solely automated decision making complement the wider data protection framework’s existing data subject rights, including the rights to transparency, objection and access. Organisations must also continue to observe the data protection principles to ensure personal data is processed lawfully, fairly and transparently. These rules apply to all organisations, including public bodies.

Central government departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) have been working to draft Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard (ATRS) records since this became mandatory earlier this year. Publication plans were disrupted by the general election, but multiple records are expected to be published soon.

Since the introduction of a mandatory requirement for use of ATRS in cross-government policy, we have seen a significant acceleration in progress towards adopting it, which will be reflected soon in published records. As such, we do not believe that legislation is necessary at this time. We will continue to explore further options for encouraging and enforcing the use of the ATRS, and the need to extend the breadth of the policy beyond central government.

In the UK’s data protection framework, Article 22 of the UK GDPR sets out the rules relating to solely automated decisions that have legal or similarly significant effects on individuals. Under these circumstances, individuals have the right to specific safeguards, including being notified of the decisions, being provided information about the solely automated decision making that has been carried out, and the right to contest those decisions and to obtain human intervention.

These specific safeguards for solely automated decision making complement the wider data protection framework’s existing data subject rights, including the rights to transparency, objection and access. Organisations must also continue to observe the data protection principles to ensure personal data is processed lawfully, fairly and transparently. These rules apply to all organisations, including public bodies.

Decisions on whether new medicines should be routinely funded by the National Health Service in England are taken by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) on the basis of an evaluation of a treatment’s costs and benefits. These are very difficult decisions to make, and it is important that they are made independently and on the basis of the available evidence.

We know the NICE’s decision to not recommend Enhertu for use in the treatment of HER-2 low metastatic and unresectable breast cancer, has come as a blow to many women and their families. We understand that the NICE and NHS England have already sought to apply as much flexibility as they can in their considerations of Enhertu for HER2-low breast cancer and have made it clear to the companies that their pricing of the drug remains the main obstacle to access.

The Government wants to see a deal reached to make Enhertu available. The NICE and NHS England remain open to considering an improved offer from the companies through the rapid review process, and we strongly encourage the companies to come back to the table.

The NICE does recommend Enhertu (trastuzumab deruxtecan) in advanced breast cancer for treating HER2-positive unresectable or metastatic breast cancer after one or more anti-HER 2 treatments.

The UK National Screening Committee’s (UK NSC) evidence review for prostate cancer screening is already underway, and plans to report within the UK NSC’s three-year work plan.

The evidence review includes modelling the clinical cost effectiveness of several approaches to prostate cancer screening, including different potential ways of screening the whole population from 40 years of age onwards and targeted screening aimed at groups of people identified as being at higher than average risk, such as black men or men with a family history of cancer.

Reporting of neonatal mortality in neonatal care units is conducted through audit programmes. Data is published by the National Neonatal Audit Programme (NNAP), with the figures for January 2017 to June 2024 available at the following link:

https://www.rcpch.ac.uk/resources/nnap-data-dashboard#view-the-dashboard

In addition, Mothers and Babies: Reducing Risk through Audits and Confidential Enquiries across the UK (MBRRACE-UK) also report neonatal mortality in neonatal care units, with the figures for 2017 to 2022 available at the following link:

https://timms.le.ac.uk/mbrrace-uk-perinatal-mortality/surveillance/

The NNAP covers England, Wales, and in more recent years, Scotland, and reports the proportion of very preterm babies, those born at 24 to 31 weeks completed gestation, who are admitted to a neonatal unit and die before discharge home, or 44 weeks post-menstrual age, whichever occurs sooner. It does not, therefore, report on babies born before 24 weeks or after 31 weeks, or babies not admitted to a neonatal unit.

The MBRRACE report covers the United Kingdom and captures mortality rates up to 28 days after birth, broken down by the level of neonatal care provided by the trust or health board where the birth occurred.

These data sources only give a partial view of infant mortality in England. All infant deaths, both neonatal and post-neonatal, in England and Wales are reported by the Office for National Statistics, and are available at the following link:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/childhoodinfantandperinatalmortalityinenglandandwales/latest

Department officials meet with Welsh authorities on a regular basis to discuss a range of maternity and neonatal-related issues.

NHS England recently completed an update to the Neonatal Critical Care service specification. Service specifications set national standards which all commissioned providers of Neonatal Critical Care services are required to meet. The updated specification for Neonatal Critical Care outlines nurse staffing requirements for the three different levels of neonatal care, including high-risk neonatal intensive care services. The specification requires neonatal units to meet the British Association of Perinatal Medicine’s (BAPM) standards in relation to safe staffing limits for registered nurses with a neonatal Qualification in Specialty. The service specification is available at the following link:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Neonatal-critical-care-service-specification-March-2024.pdf

Furthermore, the BAPM standards are available at the following link:

https://www.bapm.org/resources/service-and-quality-standards-for-provision-of-neonatal-care-in-the-uk

All neonatal units receive funding depending on the number of days that care is provided, as well as the type of care provided. Specific prices for a ‘cot day’ of neonatal care activity are agreed between local commissioners and National Health Service providers.

From the most recent National Cost Collection for the NHS, in 2022/23, the average national unit cost for neonatal intensive care was £1,879 per bed day. The average national unit cost for neonatal intensive care, special care without an external carer, was £976 per bed day.

We remain committed to securing Mr Alaa Abd El-Fattah's release. We raise his case at the highest levels. The Prime Minister did so with President Sisi on 8 August, the Foreign Secretary with Foreign Minister Abdelatty on 7 October and myself with Foreign Minister Abdelatty on 15 October. Our approach to the case is under regular review. It is not appropriate to speculate on possible future designations.

The Statement of Compliance with the Code of Practice for Statistics sets out how the Home Office and all Government departments should comply with the Code of Practice agreed by the UK Statistics Authority (UKSA) and Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR).

As referenced in the Ministerial Code, Ministers are mindful of the UK Statistics Authority’s Code of Practice which defines good practice in relation to official statistics, though it is not for the Home Secretary to offer guidance to government on the public disclosure of unpublished data.

Our Head of Profession for Statistics meets regularly with the OSR to discuss statistics matters, including the department’s approach to handling requests for operational data that might not be routinely published. OSR have been supportive of the general approach this department has taken. In the note on embedding transparency in government written by the OSR Director General and published on 14^th October, the Home Office was cited as having demonstrated good practice in this regard.

The Statement of Compliance with the Code of Practice for Statistics sets out how the Home Office and all Government departments should comply with the Code of Practice agreed by the UK Statistics Authority (UKSA) and Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR).

As referenced in the Ministerial Code, Ministers are mindful of the UK Statistics Authority’s Code of Practice which defines good practice in relation to official statistics, though it is not for the Home Secretary to offer guidance to government on the public disclosure of unpublished data.

Our Head of Profession for Statistics meets regularly with the OSR to discuss statistics matters, including the department’s approach to handling requests for operational data that might not be routinely published. OSR have been supportive of the general approach this department has taken. In the note on embedding transparency in government written by the OSR Director General and published on 14^th October, the Home Office was cited as having demonstrated good practice in this regard.

The Home Office publishes quarterly data on detention and returns in the “Immigration system statistics release”. Data up to the end of June 2024 was published on 22^nd August 2024 following our usual publication cycle. The Home Office pre-announces these statistical releases in the “Research and statistics calendar”, in accordance with its Statement of compliance with the Code of Practice for Statistics.

Publishing timescales for returns and detention statistics are in line with other statistical indicators published in the Immigration system statistics release. For information about our statistics, and our quality assurance processes, please see the user guide.

Official statistics published by the Home Office are kept under review in line with the Code of Practice for Statistics, taking into account a number of factors including user needs, as well as quality and availability of data.

Access to audio recordings of proceedings in the Crown Court is at the discretion of the Court, subject to procedures and principles set out in the Criminal Procedure Rules and Criminal Practice Directions.