Asked by: Jo White (Labour - Bassetlaw)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how much each country has paid back for healthcare use by their citizens in the UK within the same year in the latest year for which figures are available.
Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
NHS care is provided free at the point of use to people who are ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom, including people who were born abroad if they are not subject to immigration controls. Where the person is not ordinarily resident, the National Health Service recovers costs for healthcare provided in the UK through the immigration health surcharge (IHS), directly charging individuals for care provided and charging countries responsible for their healthcare costs through reciprocal healthcare agreements.
The UK’s reciprocal healthcare agreements with the European Union, European Free Trade Association states and Switzerland allow for the reimbursement of costs at a country level. The UK pays for healthcare costs of eligible people visiting or living in these countries under these agreements. For other countries, the UK does not fund overseas treatment and NHS costs incurred are recovered through the IHS or directly charging the individual.
The following table shows the Department’s income and expenditure on overseas healthcare from the United Kingdom’s reciprocal healthcare agreements for 2023/24, the latest year for which figures are available:
Country | 2023/24 income (£) | 2023/24 expenditure (£) |
Austria | 327,322.25 | 3,360,423.14 |
Belgium | 3,474,379.36 | 3,822,245.19 |
Bulgaria | 81,739.18 | 1,212,566.29 |
Croatia | 36,473.40 | 365,199.00 |
Cyprus | 482,172.64 | 56,367,818.62 |
Czech Republic | (148,293.65) | 758,458.60 |
Denmark | - | - |
Estonia | - | - |
Finland | 109,284.40 | 7,213.62 |
France | 11,051,032.23 | 186,694,473.76 |
Germany | 3,559,100.19 | 10,919,120.07 |
Greece | 553,518.12 | 5,335,540.50 |
Hungary | - | 4,961.18 |
Iceland | (6,342.41) | 239,528.19 |
Ireland | (17,810,150.56) | 225,245,716.37 |
Italy | 2,208,886.74 | 172,132.80 |
Latvia | (762,470.36) | 26,357.08 |
Liechtenstein | 1,915.64 | 176.43 |
Lithuania | 75,266.54 | 242,985.85 |
Luxembourg | (265,645.79) | 575,414.85 |
Malta | 798,235.85 | - |
Netherlands | 2,981,546.13 | 1,485,724.03 |
Norway | - | (863.95) |
Poland | 7,123,224.03 | 386,044.52 |
Portugal | 1,871,249.74 | (356,506.41) |
Romania | 2,999,264.69 | 28,944.82 |
Slovakia | 782,608.15 | 557,904.39 |
Slovenia | 24,181.42 | 279,420.15 |
Spain | 6,775,123.13 | 441,009,133.86 |
Sweden | 2,580,816.63 | 2,960,047.61 |
Switzerland | 670,476.95 | 7,255,687.60 |
Total | 29,574,914.65 | 948,955,868.18 |
The figures in the table above relate to all reciprocal healthcare agreements where costs are exchanged between the UK and other countries. These figures are not directly comparable to the figures quoted in the Department’s accounts, which are not broken down by country and include accounting treatment and aggregation of other costs. Negative values in the table above reflect adjustments to prior year forecasts compared to actual receipts/payments received from member states.
Asked by: Jo White (Labour - Bassetlaw)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how much his Department has spent on overseas healthcare in the latest year for which figures are available, broken down by country.
Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
NHS care is provided free at the point of use to people who are ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom, including people who were born abroad if they are not subject to immigration controls. Where the person is not ordinarily resident, the National Health Service recovers costs for healthcare provided in the UK through the immigration health surcharge (IHS), directly charging individuals for care provided and charging countries responsible for their healthcare costs through reciprocal healthcare agreements.
The UK’s reciprocal healthcare agreements with the European Union, European Free Trade Association states and Switzerland allow for the reimbursement of costs at a country level. The UK pays for healthcare costs of eligible people visiting or living in these countries under these agreements. For other countries, the UK does not fund overseas treatment and NHS costs incurred are recovered through the IHS or directly charging the individual.
The following table shows the Department’s income and expenditure on overseas healthcare from the United Kingdom’s reciprocal healthcare agreements for 2023/24, the latest year for which figures are available:
Country | 2023/24 income (£) | 2023/24 expenditure (£) |
Austria | 327,322.25 | 3,360,423.14 |
Belgium | 3,474,379.36 | 3,822,245.19 |
Bulgaria | 81,739.18 | 1,212,566.29 |
Croatia | 36,473.40 | 365,199.00 |
Cyprus | 482,172.64 | 56,367,818.62 |
Czech Republic | (148,293.65) | 758,458.60 |
Denmark | - | - |
Estonia | - | - |
Finland | 109,284.40 | 7,213.62 |
France | 11,051,032.23 | 186,694,473.76 |
Germany | 3,559,100.19 | 10,919,120.07 |
Greece | 553,518.12 | 5,335,540.50 |
Hungary | - | 4,961.18 |
Iceland | (6,342.41) | 239,528.19 |
Ireland | (17,810,150.56) | 225,245,716.37 |
Italy | 2,208,886.74 | 172,132.80 |
Latvia | (762,470.36) | 26,357.08 |
Liechtenstein | 1,915.64 | 176.43 |
Lithuania | 75,266.54 | 242,985.85 |
Luxembourg | (265,645.79) | 575,414.85 |
Malta | 798,235.85 | - |
Netherlands | 2,981,546.13 | 1,485,724.03 |
Norway | - | (863.95) |
Poland | 7,123,224.03 | 386,044.52 |
Portugal | 1,871,249.74 | (356,506.41) |
Romania | 2,999,264.69 | 28,944.82 |
Slovakia | 782,608.15 | 557,904.39 |
Slovenia | 24,181.42 | 279,420.15 |
Spain | 6,775,123.13 | 441,009,133.86 |
Sweden | 2,580,816.63 | 2,960,047.61 |
Switzerland | 670,476.95 | 7,255,687.60 |
Total | 29,574,914.65 | 948,955,868.18 |
The figures in the table above relate to all reciprocal healthcare agreements where costs are exchanged between the UK and other countries. These figures are not directly comparable to the figures quoted in the Department’s accounts, which are not broken down by country and include accounting treatment and aggregation of other costs. Negative values in the table above reflect adjustments to prior year forecasts compared to actual receipts/payments received from member states.
Asked by: Jo White (Labour - Bassetlaw)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what consideration he has made of bringing back the Access to Elected Office Fund for disabled candidates seeking election.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
It is this government’s ambition to see more disabled people in public office. We have been clear that we will champion disabled people’s rights and work closely with them so that disabled people’s views and voices are at the heart of decision-making.
A new fund is currently being developed to assist with the additional disability-related costs of contesting elected office. More information about the fund will be announced in due course.
Asked by: Jo White (Labour - Bassetlaw)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the proposed changes to English language requirements for Indefinite Leave to Remain applies to those on the BN(O) route.
Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
The Government remains steadfast in its support for members of the Hong Kong community in the UK.
BN(O) visa holders will attract a 5-year reduction in the qualifying period for settlement, meaning they will continue to be able to settle in the UK after 5 years’ residence, subject to meeting the mandatory requirements.
The new mandatory requirements for settlement are basic requirements that we think are reasonable for people to meet if they want to settle here. However, we are seeking views on earned settlement through the public consultation A Fairer Pathway to Settlement and will continue to listen to the views of Hong Kongers. Until that concludes, we cannot confirm whether any future uplift in the English language requirement will apply to those on the BN(O) route.
In the meantime, the current rules for settlement under the BN(O) route will continue to apply.
Asked by: Jo White (Labour - Bassetlaw)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether any future uplift in the settlement requirement for English will apply to those on the BN(O) visa route.
Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
The Government remains steadfast in its support for members of the Hong Kong community in the UK.
BN(O) visa holders will attract a 5-year reduction in the qualifying period for settlement, meaning they will continue to be able to settle in the UK after 5 years’ residence, subject to meeting the mandatory requirements.
The new mandatory requirements for settlement are basic requirements that we think are reasonable for people to meet if they want to settle here. However, we are seeking views on earned settlement through the public consultation A Fairer Pathway to Settlement and will continue to listen to the views of Hong Kongers. Until that concludes, we cannot confirm whether any future uplift in the English language requirement will apply to those on the BN(O) route.
In the meantime, the current rules for settlement under the BN(O) route will continue to apply.
Asked by: Jo White (Labour - Bassetlaw)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether his Department plans to develop a modern service framework for kidney disease.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
As announced in the 10-Year Health Plan, as well as an overall quality strategy, the National Quality Board will oversee the development of a new series of service frameworks.
The modern service frameworks will define an aspirational, long-term outcome goal for a major condition and will then identify the best evidenced interventions and the necessary support for delivery.
Early priorities will include cardiovascular disease, severe mental illness, and the first ever service framework for frailty and dementia. The Government will consider other long-term conditions for future waves of modern service frameworks. The criteria for determining other conditions for future modern service frameworks will be based on where there is potential for rapid and significant improvements in quality of care and productivity.
Asked by: Jo White (Labour - Bassetlaw)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of a modern service framework for kidney disease on improving outcomes for patients with chronic kidney disease who have received organ transplants.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
As announced in the 10-Year Health Plan, as well as an overall quality strategy, the National Quality Board will oversee the development of a new series of service frameworks.
The modern service frameworks will define an aspirational, long-term outcome goal for a major condition and will then identify the best evidenced interventions and the necessary support for delivery.
Early priorities will include cardiovascular disease, severe mental illness, and the first ever service framework for frailty and dementia. The Government will consider other long-term conditions for future waves of modern service frameworks. The criteria for determining other conditions for future modern service frameworks will be based on where there is potential for rapid and significant improvements in quality of care and productivity.
Asked by: Jo White (Labour - Bassetlaw)
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 need for a Modern Service Framework for kidney disease to improve (a) earlier diagnosis, (b) care quality and (c) outcomes.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
As announced in the 10-Year Health Plan, as well as an overall quality strategy, the National Quality Board will oversee the development of a new series of service frameworks.
The modern service frameworks will define an aspirational, long-term outcome goal for a major condition and will then identify the best evidenced interventions and the necessary support for delivery.
Early priorities will include cardiovascular disease, severe mental illness, and the first ever service framework for frailty and dementia. The Government will consider other long-term conditions for future waves of modern service frameworks. The criteria for determining other conditions for future modern service frameworks will be based on where there is potential for rapid and significant improvements in quality of care and productivity.
Asked by: Jo White (Labour - Bassetlaw)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what progress her Department has made on implementing the actions outlined in the document entitled Green Book Review: Findings and Actions, published on 11 June 2025.
Answered by James Murray - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
The Chancellor has listened to regional leaders who have said that, for too long, the Green Book has downplayed the importance of local outcomes and the potential of targeted regional investment. The Chancellor commissioned a new review of the Green Book.
The conclusions of that review were published in June, setting out a new approach to public sector appraisal that will deliver a more effective assessment of place-based interventions. This includes the introduction of place-based business cases that will galvanise departments across Whitehall and highlight the reinforcing effects of different investments within an area.
Liverpool, Plymouth, Port Talbot and Birmingham will be the first early adopters of place-based business cases. HM Treasury will also publish an updated Green Book at the start of 2026.
A cross-government taskforce has been established to develop the approach to place-based business cases and oversee their implementation. This taskforce is currently comprised of the Second Permanent Secretary of HM Treasury responsible for regional growth and devolution, the Director General for Local Government, Growth and Communities in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, the Director General for Public Transport and Local Group in the Department for Transport, and the CEO of the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority.
Asked by: Jo White (Labour - Bassetlaw)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if she will publish the membership of the Green Book Review taskforce.
Answered by James Murray - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
The Chancellor has listened to regional leaders who have said that, for too long, the Green Book has downplayed the importance of local outcomes and the potential of targeted regional investment. The Chancellor commissioned a new review of the Green Book.
The conclusions of that review were published in June, setting out a new approach to public sector appraisal that will deliver a more effective assessment of place-based interventions. This includes the introduction of place-based business cases that will galvanise departments across Whitehall and highlight the reinforcing effects of different investments within an area.
Liverpool, Plymouth, Port Talbot and Birmingham will be the first early adopters of place-based business cases. HM Treasury will also publish an updated Green Book at the start of 2026.
A cross-government taskforce has been established to develop the approach to place-based business cases and oversee their implementation. This taskforce is currently comprised of the Second Permanent Secretary of HM Treasury responsible for regional growth and devolution, the Director General for Local Government, Growth and Communities in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, the Director General for Public Transport and Local Group in the Department for Transport, and the CEO of the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority.