Kevin Barron Portrait

Kevin Barron

Labour - Former Member for Rother Valley

Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
12th Jul 2017 - 6th Nov 2019
Committee of Privileges
26th Oct 2017 - 25th Feb 2019
Committee of Privileges
21st Nov 2017 - 23rd Oct 2018
Liaison Committee (Commons)
6th Nov 2017 - 23rd Oct 2018
Committee on Standards
12th Jul 2017 - 15th Oct 2018
Committee of Privileges
4th Nov 2015 - 3rd May 2017
Committee of Privileges
28th Oct 2015 - 3rd May 2017
Liaison Committee (Commons)
10th Sep 2015 - 3rd May 2017
Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
18th Jun 2015 - 3rd May 2017
Committee on Standards
18th Jun 2015 - 3rd May 2017
Committee of Privileges
15th Jan 2013 - 30th Mar 2015
Committee on Standards
15th Jan 2013 - 30th Mar 2015
Committee of Privileges
7th Jan 2013 - 30th Mar 2015
Committee on Standards
7th Jan 2013 - 30th Mar 2015
Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
27th Jul 2010 - 30th Mar 2015
Liaison Committee (Commons)
11th Jul 2005 - 30th Mar 2015
Standards and Privileges
27th Jul 2010 - 7th Jan 2013
Standards and Privileges
12th Jul 2005 - 7th Jan 2013
Health and Social Care Committee
18th Jul 2005 - 6th May 2010
Health and Social Care Committee
12th Jul 2005 - 6th May 2010
Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament
1st Jun 1997 - 17th Jul 2005
Shadow Spokesperson (Health)
1st Jan 1995 - 1st Jan 1998
Shadow Spokesperson (Work and Pensions)
1st Jan 1993 - 31st Dec 1995
Shadow Spokesperson (Energy and Climate Change)
1st Jan 1988 - 1st Jan 1993


Division Voting information

Kevin Barron has voted in 2380 divisions, and 57 times against the majority of their Party.

22 Oct 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 19 Labour Aye votes vs 217 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 329 Noes - 299
22 Oct 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 5 Labour Aye votes vs 233 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 308 Noes - 322
19 Oct 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) Acts - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 6 Labour No votes vs 231 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 322 Noes - 306
17 Oct 2019 - Business of the House (Saturday 19 October) - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 2 Labour No votes vs 206 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 287 Noes - 275
4 Sep 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 6) Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 8 Labour Aye votes vs 224 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 65 Noes - 495
12 Jun 2019 - Leaving the EU: Business of the House - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 8 Labour No votes vs 222 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 298 Noes - 309
3 Apr 2019 - Business of the House - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 9 Labour No votes vs 228 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 310 Noes - 310
3 Apr 2019 - Business of the House - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 8 Labour No votes vs 230 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 312 Noes - 311
3 Apr 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 7 Labour No votes vs 230 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 315 Noes - 310
3 Apr 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 9 Labour No votes vs 229 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 313 Noes - 312
1 Apr 2019 - EU: Withdrawal and Future Relationship (Votes) - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 25 Labour No votes vs 185 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 261 Noes - 282
1 Apr 2019 - EU: Withdrawal and Future Relationship (Votes) - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 24 Labour No votes vs 203 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 280 Noes - 292
1 Apr 2019 - EU: Withdrawal and Future Relationship (Votes) - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 18 Labour No votes vs 121 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 191 Noes - 292
29 Mar 2019 - United Kingdom’s Withdrawal from the European Union - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 5 Labour Aye votes vs 234 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 286 Noes - 344
27 Mar 2019 - EU: Withdrawal and Future Relationship Votes - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 42 Labour No votes vs 143 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 188 Noes - 283
27 Mar 2019 - EU: Withdrawal and Future Relationship Votes - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 22 Labour No votes vs 111 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 184 Noes - 293
27 Mar 2019 - EU: Withdrawal and Future Relationship Votes - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 27 Labour No votes vs 198 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 268 Noes - 295
25 Mar 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) Act - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 8 Labour No votes vs 232 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 329 Noes - 302
25 Mar 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) Act - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 9 Labour No votes vs 228 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 311 Noes - 314
25 Mar 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) Act - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 8 Labour No votes vs 232 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 327 Noes - 300
19 Mar 2019 - Foreign Affairs Committee - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 13 Labour No votes vs 168 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 199 Noes - 134
14 Mar 2019 - UK’s Withdrawal from the European Union - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 18 Labour No votes vs 25 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 85 Noes - 334
14 Mar 2019 - UK’s Withdrawal from the European Union - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 6 Labour No votes vs 230 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 311 Noes - 314
14 Mar 2019 - UK’s Withdrawal from the European Union - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 6 Labour No votes vs 231 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 312 Noes - 314
14 Mar 2019 - UK’s Withdrawal from the European Union - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 1 Labour No votes vs 236 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 302 Noes - 318
12 Mar 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) Act - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Labour Aye votes vs 238 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 242 Noes - 391
27 Feb 2019 - UK’s Withdrawal from the EU - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 7 Labour No votes vs 225 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 288 Noes - 324
14 Feb 2019 - UK’s Withdrawal from the EU - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 4 Labour Aye votes vs 244 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 258 Noes - 303
29 Jan 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 2 Labour No votes vs 241 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 296 Noes - 327
29 Jan 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 14 Labour No votes vs 232 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 301 Noes - 321
29 Jan 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 14 Labour No votes vs 226 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 298 Noes - 321
29 Jan 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 13 Labour No votes vs 224 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 290 Noes - 322
29 Jan 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 7 Labour Aye votes vs 239 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 317 Noes - 301
15 Jan 2019 - European Union (Withdrawal) Act - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Labour Aye votes vs 248 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 202 Noes - 432
9 Jan 2019 - BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (SECTION 13(1)(b) OF THE EUROPEAN UNION (WITHDRAWAL) ACT 2018) (NO. 2) - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Labour No votes vs 238 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 308 Noes - 297
13 Jun 2018 - European Union (Withdrawal) Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 15 Labour Aye votes vs 74 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 327 Noes - 126
30 Jan 2018 - High Speed Rail (West Midlands - Crewe) Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 2 Labour No votes vs 13 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 295 Noes - 12
16 Dec 2015 - Representation of the People (Proportional Representation) (House of Commons) - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 16 Labour Aye votes vs 26 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 27 Noes - 164
2 Dec 2015 - ISIL in Syria - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 56 Labour No votes vs 139 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 211 Noes - 390
2 Dec 2015 - ISIL in Syria - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 65 Labour Aye votes vs 153 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 397 Noes - 223
11 Sep 2015 - Assisted Dying (No. 2) Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 73 Labour Aye votes vs 91 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 118 Noes - 330
26 Jan 2015 - Infrastructure Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 1 Labour No votes vs 215 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 224 Noes - 320
27 Oct 2014 - Recall of MPs Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 41 Labour Aye votes vs 162 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 166 Noes - 340
10 Jul 2012 - House of Lords Reform Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 26 Labour No votes vs 201 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 462 Noes - 124
12 Mar 2012 - Backbench Business Committee - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 36 Labour No votes vs 50 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 203 Noes - 82
24 May 2011 - Eurozone Financial Assistance - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 3 Labour Aye votes vs 15 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 267 Noes - 46
4 Mar 2010 - Chair (Terminology) - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 24 Labour No votes vs 119 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 279 Noes - 31
4 Mar 2010 - Chair (Terminology) - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 27 Labour Aye votes vs 124 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 106 Noes - 221
2 Mar 2009 - Political Parties and Elections Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 93 Labour No votes vs 155 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 235 Noes - 176
2 Mar 2009 - Political Parties and Elections Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 83 Labour No votes vs 157 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 223 Noes - 158
2 Mar 2009 - Political Parties and Elections Bill - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 77 Labour No votes vs 156 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 213 Noes - 153
3 Jul 2008 - Members’ Salaries - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 82 Labour Aye votes vs 136 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 155 Noes - 196
3 Jul 2008 - Members’ Salaries - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 66 Labour Aye votes vs 159 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 141 Noes - 216
3 Jul 2008 - Members’ Salaries - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 62 Labour Aye votes vs 152 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 123 Noes - 224
7 Mar 2007 - House of Lords Reform - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 152 Labour No votes vs 162 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 416 Noes - 163
7 Mar 2007 - House of Lords Reform - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 111 Labour Aye votes vs 197 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 196 Noes - 375
1 Nov 2006 - Legislative Process - View Vote Context
Kevin Barron voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 10 Labour No votes vs 261 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 290 Noes - 199
View All Kevin Barron Division Votes

All Debates

Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.

View all Kevin Barron's debates

Latest EDMs signed by Kevin Barron

30th October 2019
Kevin Barron signed this EDM as a sponsor on Monday 4th November 2019

Into Film

Tabled by: Lisa Cameron (Scottish National Party - East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow)
That this House recognises the achievements of Into Film in giving every child and young person aged 5 to 19 in the UK the chance to experience film creatively; commends the organisation's ability to develop a passion for cinema in children through the creation of film clubs and stimulating discussion; …
17 signatures
(Most recent: 5 Nov 2019)
Signatures by party:
Labour: 12
Scottish National Party: 2
Democratic Unionist Party: 1
Non-affiliated: 1
The Independent Group for Change: 1
24th October 2019
Kevin Barron signed this EDM as a sponsor on Thursday 24th October 2019

A new HMS Coventry

Tabled by: Jim Cunningham (Labour - Coventry South)
That this House welcomes the Government's decision to purchase five new type 31 frigates for the Royal Navy; recognises that the name Coventry has been associated with the Royal Navy since 1658; further recognises that six ships have borne the name Coventry in this time until 2002; acknowledges the need …
20 signatures
(Most recent: 30 Oct 2019)
Signatures by party:
Labour: 7
Conservative: 4
Democratic Unionist Party: 4
Scottish National Party: 4
The Independent Group for Change: 1
View All Kevin Barron's signed Early Day Motions

Commons initiatives

These initiatives were driven by Kevin Barron, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.

MPs who are act as Ministers or Shadow Ministers are generally restricted from performing Commons initiatives other than Urgent Questions.


Kevin Barron has not been granted any Urgent Questions

1 Adjournment Debate led by Kevin Barron

Thursday 6th February 2014

1 Bill introduced by Kevin Barron


The Bill failed to complete its passage through Parliament before the end of the session. This means the Bill will make no further progress. A Bill to require the Secretary of State to report on means of requiring tobacco companies to meet the costs of smoking cessation services; to make provision about the advertising and marketing of products that are alternatives to tobacco; to require tobacco companies to publish information about their activities in relation to such products; to create an offence of selling tobacco without a licence; and for connected purposes.


Last Event - 1st Reading: House Of Commons
Tuesday 30th October 2018
(Read Debate)

Kevin Barron has not co-sponsored any Bills in the current parliamentary sitting


75 Written Questions

(View all written questions)
Written Questions can be tabled by MPs and Lords to request specific information information on the work, policy and activities of a Government Department
17th Jun 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what the current balance of the pharmacy integration fund is; and what initiatives have been supported by that fund since its inception.

NHS England and NHS Improvement are awaiting the completion of the annual audit of its accounts, therefore no final figure is currently available for the balance of the Pharmacy Integration Fund (PhIF). The PhIF has supported a range of initiatives, including:

- Recruitment and training of pharmacists to support integrated urgent care services, offering patients and care staff direct access to clinical advice and care from pharmacists;

- Putting pharmacists and pharmacy technicians into the multi-disciplinary teams delivering enhanced health in care homes, to support medicines optimisation for people who live in care homes;

- The development of an urgent medicines supply service. This connects people who contact NHS 111 for urgent access to medicines with local community pharmacies who are able to dispense, and redirects demand out of general practitioner out of hours services, and/or accident and emergency departments;

- The piloting of a minor illness service, which enables people who contact NHS 111 to get urgent care and advice from a local community pharmacy for a range of common illness complaints; and

- Providing leadership training for the profession to support them to work effectively with their partners in the emerging integrated care systems, with a focus on delivering the range of benefits of medicines optimisation.

Further information can be found on NHS England’s website and accessed via the following link:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/primary-care/pharmacy/pharmacy-integration-fund/

22nd May 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what estimate his Department has made of the average number of hours general practitioners spend on writing NHS prescriptions in England per week.

The data requested is not collected or held centrally.

22nd May 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how much was spent on delivering the NHS England Stay Well Pharmacy campaign; and over what time period those funds were spent.

The most recent NHS England ‘Pharmacy Advice’ campaign - previously called the Stay Well Pharmacy campaign - ran between 4 February and 17 March 2019. We are informed by NHS England that the overall cost of running the advertising campaign was £2 million.

22nd May 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of (a) the implementation costs and (b) potential benefits of community pharmacists having write access to NHS patient records.

The Department has made no assessment of the implementation costs of providing write access to patient records. However, in future, our ambition is for pharmacists to play an even greater role within the National Health Service and we understand that write access to NHS patient records will support this.

Providing read and write access to general practitioner (GP) records for pharmacists is complex. In some areas medical records are already shared between professionals to support locally commissioned services. To develop a national solution Departmental officials, NHS England and NHS Digital have considered important issues such as technical requirements, data standards, patient consent and data security to provide write access. Work is progressing and during 2019 pilots will commence to test that digital transfer can successfully take place between community pharmacy and GP IT systems.

22nd May 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what funding his Department has allocated to (a) the Community Pharmacy Referral Scheme and (b) the Digital Illness Referral Service in each fiscal year since the programmes have been in operation.

In December 2016, a new referral scheme to community pharmacy was initiated from NHS 111 to community pharmacy in response to urgent requests for medication. This has been running as a pilot with national coverage achieved by June 2017 with over 4,000 pharmacies now registered to deliver the service. This pilot is named as the NHS Urgent Medicines Supply Advanced Service (NUMSAS) within the community pharmacy contractual framework running until October 2019.

From December 2017, a further scheme started in the North East enabling the referral of patients from NHS 111 to community pharmacy for a community pharmacist consultation about minor illness symptoms. This pilot known as the Digital Minor Illness Referral Service (DMIRS) was extended to Devon, London and the East Midlands from December 2018 and is continuing until October 2019. Over 2,000 pharmacies are registered to deliver the minor illness service.

Both schemes are funded by the Pharmacy Integration Fund with the audited spend provided by NHS England as follows:

NUMSAS

DMIRS

2016/17

£9,600

-

2017/18

£1,190,401

£250,000

The audited spend for 2018/19 is not yet available.

9th Apr 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment the Government has made of the effectiveness of the implementation of the guidance entitled Items which should not be routinely prescribed in primary care: Guidance for CCGs.

We are informed by NHS England that in the period up to and including October 2018, spend on the 18 low priority medicines has fallen by £31.1 million from £133.6 million, compared to 2016/17. This represents a reduction of 23%.

The volume of medicines prescribed reduced by 27% and the number of patients prescribed these medicines reduced by 32%.

In addition, NHS England has worked with PrescQIPP and the NHS Business Services Authority to refine its assessment of the amount of money spent on over the counter medicines.

In the 12 months to January 2019, the total National Health Service spend in England on over the counter medicines was £449.4 million. This was a saving on total spend of £25.9 million from the 12 months to January 2018, which was £475.3 million. This saving does not account for the potential impact to the NHS from a reduced number of general practitioner appointments, for which no assessment has been made.

These savings will be reinvested into the NHS, ensuring patients can access high quality care now and in the future.

3rd Apr 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of the saving to the NHS of reducing the number of prescriptions for over-the-counter medicines.

The Department has made no such assessment. From December 2017 to March 2018, NHS England carried out a public consultation on reducing prescribing of over-the-counter medicines for minor, short-term health concerns, ‘Conditions for which over the counter items should not routinely be prescribed in primary care: A consultation on guidance for CCGs’ which can be found at the following link:

https://www.engage.england.nhs.uk/consultation/over-the-counter-items-not-routinely-prescribed/

At the end of March 2018, NHS England published guidance to enable savings of up to £100 million for frontline care each year by curbing prescriptions for ‘over the counter’ medicines. The guidance does not affect prescribing of over the counter items for longer term or more complex conditions, or where minor illnesses are symptomatic or a side effect of something more serious.

We are informed by NHS England that in the 12 months to January 2019, the total National Health Service spend in England on over the counter items was £449.4 million. This was a saving on total spend of £25.9 million from the corresponding figure for the 12 months to January 2018, which was £475.3 million. This saving does not account for the potential impact to the NHS from a reduced number of general practitioner appointments, for which no assessment has been made.

25th Feb 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, when he plans to bring forward legislative proposal for a state-backed indemnity scheme for health care professionals.

The National Health Service (Clinical Negligence Scheme for General Practice) Regulations 2019 were laid in parliament on 25 February 2019 and come into force on 1 April 2019. The Regulations establish a scheme which provides indemnity cover for future clinical negligence liabilities of general practitioners, and others working in general practice in respect of services provided as part of the National Health Service in England.

The Department also intends to establish the arrangements for an existing liabilities scheme in April 2019, subject to satisfactory discussions with the Medical Defence Organisations.

25th Feb 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to the Answer of 14 February 2019 to Question 219373 on UK Antimicrobial Resistance Diagnostics Collaborative, what representations his Department has received from members of that Collaborative; if he will publish the names of its members; and whether a Chair of that Collaborative has been appointed.

NHS England established the United Kingdom Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) Diagnostics Collaborative in 2018 to deliver the UK’s diagnostic ambitions for AMR. The Collaborative has played a valuable role in developing the diagnostic elements of the new five-year UK AMR national action plan, published in January this year.

The work of the Collaborative contributes directly to the Government’s commitments on AMR, and the Collaborative’s secretariat communicates with the Department on a regular basis and it has been represented by its secretariat and former chair in the UK AMR Programme’s governance groups.

The Collaborative’s chair remains vacant while NHS England develops detailed plans to support the implementation of the new national plan on AMR. As part of this work, the membership of the Collaborative is under review.

Current membership is drawn from a range of stakeholders across Government and its agencies, the devolved administrations, the health system, veterinary medicine, professional bodies, academia, the research community and industry. Members at or above ‘very senior manager’ (VSM) level and partner agencies involved in the Collaborative are listed in the following table.

Members of the UK Antimicrobial Resistance Diagnostics Collaborative at or above VSM level

Organisation

Mohamed Sadak

Health Education England

Marion Lyons

Welsh Government

Gerry Waldron

Public Health Agency Northern Ireland

Neil Woodford

Public Health England

Partner Agencies

NHS Scotland

NHS England

NHS Sheffield Clinical Commissioning Group

Department of Health and Social Care

NHS Improvement

University of Bristol

Institute of Biomedical Science

Association of Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine

UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations

Royal College of Pathology

Royal College of General Practice

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Medical Technology Guidance

Sherwood Forrest NHS Foundation Trust

Royal College of Nursing

University of Surrey

Addenbrookes Hospital NHS Trust

University of Edinburgh

Medical Research Council

British In Vitro Diagnostic Association

NIHR Community Healthcare MedTech and In Vitro Diagnostics Co-operative

Innovate UK

NICE

Royal Cornwall Hospital

Kingston University

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Responsible Use of Medicines in Agriculture Alliance

University of Liverpool

Ulster University

University of Exeter

Westpoint Farm Vets

University of Nottingham

Centre for Ecology and Hydrology

Cardiff University

Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Glasgow Caledonian University

12th Feb 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether the Government is on target to meet its commitment in the 2015 Comprehensive Spending Review to provide two million more diagnostic tests per year by 2020-21; and if he will make a statement.

In 2017/18 the National Health Service carried out 21.9 million diagnostic tests, nearly 1.7 million more than in 2015/16.

NHS England publishes monthly data on diagnostic waiting times which includes the volume of patients waiting for a diagnostic test. The data is available at the following link:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/diagnostics-waiting-times-and-activity/monthly-diagnostics-waiting-times-and-activity/

12th Feb 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how has the £300 million per year to fund new diagnostic equipment and additional staff capacity announced in the 2015 Comprehensive Spending Review has been allocated.

The 2015 Comprehensive Spending Review made a commitment to invest up to £300 million per year by 2020/21. The published financial profile agreed for the NHS England Cancer Programme over the four years to 2020/21 was:

2017/18

2018/19

2019/20

2020/21

£123 million

£140 million

£154 million

£190 million

This is being invested in earlier diagnosis and personalised care, including additional staff capacity and equipment. In addition, £130 million has been invested to modernise radiotherapy equipment. Funding has been allocated for over 80 new or upgraded linear accelerators across the country since October 2016.

11th Feb 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of nationally commissioning more public health services through community pharmacy.

The Government has been clear that it wants to change the focus of the health and care system onto prevention and Ministers have also set out an ambition for local pharmacies to play a stronger role in helping people stay well in the community. The Department has committed to publishing a Green Paper on prevention that will set out how these plans will be achieved in more detail. An assessment specifically focusing on the potential merits of nationally commissioning more public health services through community pharmacy has not been undertaken.

An updated list of the 1,413 pharmacies found to be eligible for the pharmacy access scheme was published in January 2018, this is publicly available and can be found at the following link:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/670305/PhAS_List_20122017_updated.pdf

A small proportion of the pharmacies eligible for the scheme will not receive a payment because they do not meet the payment criteria as set out in the Drug Tariff. This means their income in 2016/17 is greater than their 2015/16 income less a 1% efficiency saving, and/or their estimated income in 2017/18 and 2018/19 is greater than their 2015/16 income less a 3% efficiency saving. The number and proportion of pharmacies on the scheme in receipt of a payment, for each year that the scheme has been running, is set out in the following table.

Total number of eligible pharmacies

Total number of pharmacies receiving zero payments

Total number of pharmacies in receipt of payment

2016/17

1,402

47 (3%)

1,355 (97%)

2017/18

1,415[1]

57 (4%)

1,358 (96%)


[1]
Two additional pharmacies have been accepted on to the scheme since the publication of the updated list. This explains the difference in the figures of 1,413 and 1,415 for 2017/18.

The fees and allowances paid under the Community Pharmacy Contractual Framework (CPCF) for the provision of essential services, including dispensing, provided by community pharmacies each year from April 2015 to March 2018 are detailed in the following table, based on data provided by NHS England. The structure of fees and allowances does not allow payments just for dispensing to be isolated. These payments do not include the medicine margin that community pharmacies earn as part of the payment for essential services, which is paid through reimbursement within the drugs’ bill.

Enhanced services are locally commissioned. As such they are funded outside of the national CPCF and the Department does not hold the information sought.

Time period

Total essential services funding2

Total national CPCF funding (essential and advanced services) less medicines margin/ £

Funding for essential services as a proportion of total national CPCF funding (essential and advanced services) less medicines margin/ %

2015/16

1,881,828,149

2,000,000,000

94

2016/17

1,769,216,586

1,887,000,000

94

2017/18

1,668,141,583

1,792,000,000

93


2
This comprises the fees and allowances paid under Part IIIA: Professional Fees (Pharmacy Contractors) and Part VIA: Payment for Essential Services (Pharmacy Contractors) of the Drug Tariff, and through the Quality Payment Scheme and Pharmacy Access Scheme. This does not include medicines margin.

Within the NHS Long Term Plan, Government has committed to expanding the number of pharmacists in Primary Care Networks. These pharmacists are well placed to work alongside the wider medical team to optimise the use of medicines, promote medicines adherence and improve the clinical and cost effectiveness of prescribed medications. Identifying and supporting patients on complex polypharmacy and those with long term conditions necessitating repeat prescriptions will form an important part of their role. Alongside this, in August 2018, NHS England, announced plans for a new pilot scheme, with investment of £1 million from the Pharmacy Integration Fund to develop system leadership within pharmacy across all settings. These pharmacy leaders will set the vision to systematically tackle medicines optimisation priorities for the local population within GP Network and Integrated Care System foot prints, further supporting medicines adherence, and in turn reducing medicines wastage.

11th Feb 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will list each pharmacy in receipt of funding from the Pharmacy Access Scheme in each year since the establishment of that scheme.

The Government has been clear that it wants to change the focus of the health and care system onto prevention and Ministers have also set out an ambition for local pharmacies to play a stronger role in helping people stay well in the community. The Department has committed to publishing a Green Paper on prevention that will set out how these plans will be achieved in more detail. An assessment specifically focusing on the potential merits of nationally commissioning more public health services through community pharmacy has not been undertaken.

An updated list of the 1,413 pharmacies found to be eligible for the pharmacy access scheme was published in January 2018, this is publicly available and can be found at the following link:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/670305/PhAS_List_20122017_updated.pdf

A small proportion of the pharmacies eligible for the scheme will not receive a payment because they do not meet the payment criteria as set out in the Drug Tariff. This means their income in 2016/17 is greater than their 2015/16 income less a 1% efficiency saving, and/or their estimated income in 2017/18 and 2018/19 is greater than their 2015/16 income less a 3% efficiency saving. The number and proportion of pharmacies on the scheme in receipt of a payment, for each year that the scheme has been running, is set out in the following table.

Total number of eligible pharmacies

Total number of pharmacies receiving zero payments

Total number of pharmacies in receipt of payment

2016/17

1,402

47 (3%)

1,355 (97%)

2017/18

1,415[1]

57 (4%)

1,358 (96%)


[1]
Two additional pharmacies have been accepted on to the scheme since the publication of the updated list. This explains the difference in the figures of 1,413 and 1,415 for 2017/18.

The fees and allowances paid under the Community Pharmacy Contractual Framework (CPCF) for the provision of essential services, including dispensing, provided by community pharmacies each year from April 2015 to March 2018 are detailed in the following table, based on data provided by NHS England. The structure of fees and allowances does not allow payments just for dispensing to be isolated. These payments do not include the medicine margin that community pharmacies earn as part of the payment for essential services, which is paid through reimbursement within the drugs’ bill.

Enhanced services are locally commissioned. As such they are funded outside of the national CPCF and the Department does not hold the information sought.

Time period

Total essential services funding2

Total national CPCF funding (essential and advanced services) less medicines margin/ £

Funding for essential services as a proportion of total national CPCF funding (essential and advanced services) less medicines margin/ %

2015/16

1,881,828,149

2,000,000,000

94

2016/17

1,769,216,586

1,887,000,000

94

2017/18

1,668,141,583

1,792,000,000

93


2
This comprises the fees and allowances paid under Part IIIA: Professional Fees (Pharmacy Contractors) and Part VIA: Payment for Essential Services (Pharmacy Contractors) of the Drug Tariff, and through the Quality Payment Scheme and Pharmacy Access Scheme. This does not include medicines margin.

Within the NHS Long Term Plan, Government has committed to expanding the number of pharmacists in Primary Care Networks. These pharmacists are well placed to work alongside the wider medical team to optimise the use of medicines, promote medicines adherence and improve the clinical and cost effectiveness of prescribed medications. Identifying and supporting patients on complex polypharmacy and those with long term conditions necessitating repeat prescriptions will form an important part of their role. Alongside this, in August 2018, NHS England, announced plans for a new pilot scheme, with investment of £1 million from the Pharmacy Integration Fund to develop system leadership within pharmacy across all settings. These pharmacy leaders will set the vision to systematically tackle medicines optimisation priorities for the local population within GP Network and Integrated Care System foot prints, further supporting medicines adherence, and in turn reducing medicines wastage.

11th Feb 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how much and proportion of pharmacy funding has been spent on (a) dispensing and (b) enhanced services in each year since 2015-16.

The Government has been clear that it wants to change the focus of the health and care system onto prevention and Ministers have also set out an ambition for local pharmacies to play a stronger role in helping people stay well in the community. The Department has committed to publishing a Green Paper on prevention that will set out how these plans will be achieved in more detail. An assessment specifically focusing on the potential merits of nationally commissioning more public health services through community pharmacy has not been undertaken.

An updated list of the 1,413 pharmacies found to be eligible for the pharmacy access scheme was published in January 2018, this is publicly available and can be found at the following link:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/670305/PhAS_List_20122017_updated.pdf

A small proportion of the pharmacies eligible for the scheme will not receive a payment because they do not meet the payment criteria as set out in the Drug Tariff. This means their income in 2016/17 is greater than their 2015/16 income less a 1% efficiency saving, and/or their estimated income in 2017/18 and 2018/19 is greater than their 2015/16 income less a 3% efficiency saving. The number and proportion of pharmacies on the scheme in receipt of a payment, for each year that the scheme has been running, is set out in the following table.

Total number of eligible pharmacies

Total number of pharmacies receiving zero payments

Total number of pharmacies in receipt of payment

2016/17

1,402

47 (3%)

1,355 (97%)

2017/18

1,415[1]

57 (4%)

1,358 (96%)


[1]
Two additional pharmacies have been accepted on to the scheme since the publication of the updated list. This explains the difference in the figures of 1,413 and 1,415 for 2017/18.

The fees and allowances paid under the Community Pharmacy Contractual Framework (CPCF) for the provision of essential services, including dispensing, provided by community pharmacies each year from April 2015 to March 2018 are detailed in the following table, based on data provided by NHS England. The structure of fees and allowances does not allow payments just for dispensing to be isolated. These payments do not include the medicine margin that community pharmacies earn as part of the payment for essential services, which is paid through reimbursement within the drugs’ bill.

Enhanced services are locally commissioned. As such they are funded outside of the national CPCF and the Department does not hold the information sought.

Time period

Total essential services funding2

Total national CPCF funding (essential and advanced services) less medicines margin/ £

Funding for essential services as a proportion of total national CPCF funding (essential and advanced services) less medicines margin/ %

2015/16

1,881,828,149

2,000,000,000

94

2016/17

1,769,216,586

1,887,000,000

94

2017/18

1,668,141,583

1,792,000,000

93


2
This comprises the fees and allowances paid under Part IIIA: Professional Fees (Pharmacy Contractors) and Part VIA: Payment for Essential Services (Pharmacy Contractors) of the Drug Tariff, and through the Quality Payment Scheme and Pharmacy Access Scheme. This does not include medicines margin.

Within the NHS Long Term Plan, Government has committed to expanding the number of pharmacists in Primary Care Networks. These pharmacists are well placed to work alongside the wider medical team to optimise the use of medicines, promote medicines adherence and improve the clinical and cost effectiveness of prescribed medications. Identifying and supporting patients on complex polypharmacy and those with long term conditions necessitating repeat prescriptions will form an important part of their role. Alongside this, in August 2018, NHS England, announced plans for a new pilot scheme, with investment of £1 million from the Pharmacy Integration Fund to develop system leadership within pharmacy across all settings. These pharmacy leaders will set the vision to systematically tackle medicines optimisation priorities for the local population within GP Network and Integrated Care System foot prints, further supporting medicines adherence, and in turn reducing medicines wastage.

11th Feb 2019
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps are being taken to (a) increase medicines adherence for repeat prescriptions and (b) reduce medicines wastage from repeat prescriptions.

The Government has been clear that it wants to change the focus of the health and care system onto prevention and Ministers have also set out an ambition for local pharmacies to play a stronger role in helping people stay well in the community. The Department has committed to publishing a Green Paper on prevention that will set out how these plans will be achieved in more detail. An assessment specifically focusing on the potential merits of nationally commissioning more public health services through community pharmacy has not been undertaken.

An updated list of the 1,413 pharmacies found to be eligible for the pharmacy access scheme was published in January 2018, this is publicly available and can be found at the following link:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/670305/PhAS_List_20122017_updated.pdf

A small proportion of the pharmacies eligible for the scheme will not receive a payment because they do not meet the payment criteria as set out in the Drug Tariff. This means their income in 2016/17 is greater than their 2015/16 income less a 1% efficiency saving, and/or their estimated income in 2017/18 and 2018/19 is greater than their 2015/16 income less a 3% efficiency saving. The number and proportion of pharmacies on the scheme in receipt of a payment, for each year that the scheme has been running, is set out in the following table.

Total number of eligible pharmacies

Total number of pharmacies receiving zero payments

Total number of pharmacies in receipt of payment

2016/17

1,402

47 (3%)

1,355 (97%)

2017/18

1,415[1]

57 (4%)

1,358 (96%)


[1]
Two additional pharmacies have been accepted on to the scheme since the publication of the updated list. This explains the difference in the figures of 1,413 and 1,415 for 2017/18.

The fees and allowances paid under the Community Pharmacy Contractual Framework (CPCF) for the provision of essential services, including dispensing, provided by community pharmacies each year from April 2015 to March 2018 are detailed in the following table, based on data provided by NHS England. The structure of fees and allowances does not allow payments just for dispensing to be isolated. These payments do not include the medicine margin that community pharmacies earn as part of the payment for essential services, which is paid through reimbursement within the drugs’ bill.

Enhanced services are locally commissioned. As such they are funded outside of the national CPCF and the Department does not hold the information sought.

Time period

Total essential services funding2

Total national CPCF funding (essential and advanced services) less medicines margin/ £

Funding for essential services as a proportion of total national CPCF funding (essential and advanced services) less medicines margin/ %

2015/16

1,881,828,149

2,000,000,000

94

2016/17

1,769,216,586

1,887,000,000

94

2017/18

1,668,141,583

1,792,000,000

93


2
This comprises the fees and allowances paid under Part IIIA: Professional Fees (Pharmacy Contractors) and Part VIA: Payment for Essential Services (Pharmacy Contractors) of the Drug Tariff, and through the Quality Payment Scheme and Pharmacy Access Scheme. This does not include medicines margin.

Within the NHS Long Term Plan, Government has committed to expanding the number of pharmacists in Primary Care Networks. These pharmacists are well placed to work alongside the wider medical team to optimise the use of medicines, promote medicines adherence and improve the clinical and cost effectiveness of prescribed medications. Identifying and supporting patients on complex polypharmacy and those with long term conditions necessitating repeat prescriptions will form an important part of their role. Alongside this, in August 2018, NHS England, announced plans for a new pilot scheme, with investment of £1 million from the Pharmacy Integration Fund to develop system leadership within pharmacy across all settings. These pharmacy leaders will set the vision to systematically tackle medicines optimisation priorities for the local population within GP Network and Integrated Care System foot prints, further supporting medicines adherence, and in turn reducing medicines wastage.

23rd Oct 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department plans to take to reduce the geographical variation in access to high quality bacterial and viral diagnostic technology.

Public Health England (PHE) operates a number of microbiology laboratories across England which provides national coverage, regardless of geographic location, and works closely with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland’s devolved administrations. These laboratories complement and expand on the testing that is undertaken in a larger laboratory network operating throughout the National Health Service to provide frontline diagnostics.

PHE’s laboratories use many different diagnostic technologies, including traditional and molecular microbiological, serological and innovative genomic approaches to recognise pathogens and diagnose infections promptly. These cover infections caused by bacteria, viruses, fungi and protozoal parasites. The results of PHE laboratory testing are provided directly to the NHS to support patient management, to reduce risks of onwards transmission and to minimise threats to public health throughout England.

23rd Oct 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what plans he has to ensure that NHS staff are appropriately trained to use new innovations in diagnostic technology.

The Cancer Workforce Plan for England, published in December 2017 by Health Education England (HEE), set out the actions needed to target additional training support for several priority professions, including diagnostic and therapeutic radiography.

There are several initiatives to prepare the healthcare workforce, through education and training, to deliver the digital future. For example, the Topol Review, led by cardiologist, geneticist, and digital medicine researcher Dr Eric Topol and facilitated by HEE, is exploring how best to enable National Health Service staff to make the most of technologies such as genetic diagnostics.

Steve Barclay
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster
16th Oct 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department is taking to increase access to pulmonary rehabilitation.

Pulmonary rehabilitation is one of the most effective treatments for chronic lung disease. Respiratory care is one of the areas being considered as part of the National Health Service long-term plan currently in development and new guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence are due to be published in December.

The Department supports the NHS to increase access to pulmonary rehabilitation and improve the quality of care for people with long-term respiratory conditions through the following actions:

- a national roll out of the RightCare programme by NHS England which directs clinical commissioning groups to offer pulmonary rehabilitation as part of an optimal pathway for COPD patients;

- the COPD best practice tariff encourages NHS providers to refer patients for pulmonary rehabilitation as a financial incentive;

- a pulmonary rehabilitation service accreditation programme run by the Royal College of Physicians.

16th Oct 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to the World COPD Day on 21 November 2018, what steps his Department is taking to ensure the NHS long-term plan includes an expansion of pulmonary rehabilitation services.

Pulmonary rehabilitation is one of the most effective treatments for chronic lung disease. Respiratory care is one of the areas being considered as part of the National Health Service long-term plan currently in development and new guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence are due to be published in December.

The Department supports the NHS to increase access to pulmonary rehabilitation and improve the quality of care for people with long-term respiratory conditions through the following actions:

- a national roll out of the RightCare programme by NHS England which directs clinical commissioning groups to offer pulmonary rehabilitation as part of an optimal pathway for COPD patients;

- the COPD best practice tariff encourages NHS providers to refer patients for pulmonary rehabilitation as a financial incentive;

- a pulmonary rehabilitation service accreditation programme run by the Royal College of Physicians.

18th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to his Department’s single departmental plan, for what reason the intention to work with Public Health England to deliver the new Tobacco Control Plan under Objective 1.1 was removed in the update of 23 May 2018.

The Single Departmental Plan published on 23 May 2018 is a concise summary of the highest level objectives for the financial year 2018-19 rather than a comprehensive account of all the activities the Department is planning to undertake. The fact that a commitment or activity has not been included in the summary does not imply that there is no intention to work on it.

The Government is continuing to reduce harm caused by tobacco. Last year we published a new tobacco control plan to build on that success and on 7 June 2018 we published a delivery plan setting out actions for meeting the aims of the tobacco control plan and how progress will be monitored. A copy of the delivery plan is available at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tobacco-control-plan-delivery-plan-2017-to-2022

18th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what the full cost of implementing the Falsified Medicines Directive is in hospitals, dispensing doctor practices and community pharmacies.

The Government is continuing work with stakeholders to assess the full costs of implementing the ‘safety features’ under the Falsified Medicines Directive in the United Kingdom taking account of the different approaches and use of the flexibilities allowed by the delegated regulation.

The European Union has published an assessment of the overall impact of the Delegated Regulation, which includes information on hospitals, doctors and pharmacy, and is available at the following link:

http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/impact/ia_carried_out/docs/ia_2015/swd_2015_0189_en.pdf

18th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what penalties will be levied on (a) hospitals, (b) dispensing doctors and (c) community pharmacies if IT systems are found to be not compliant with the Falsified Medicines Directive by February 2019.

A United Kingdom Government consultation on the implementation of the European Union Delegated Regulation on ‘safety features’ under the Falsified Medicines Directive will be released shortly. The consultation and accompanying impact assessment will focus on where the UK has legal scope to make changes. This will include the Government’s proposals over penalties and sanctions on hospitals, dispensing doctors and community pharmacies.

18th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many and what proportion of dispensing points will have a Falsified Medicines Directive compliant IT system in place by February 2019.

The European Union Delegated Regulation on ‘safety features’ under the Falsified Medicines Directive (FMD) comes into force in the United Kingdom on 9 February 2019 and will be directly applicable on all relevant actors in the medicines supply chain, including those dispensing medicines. Healthcare institutions (hospitals and general practitioner practices) and pharmacies will need to be able to decommission products from the national repository by this time. However, in the case of other places where medicines are supplied to patients the delegated regulation allows member states some flexibilities as to where products are decommissioned in the medicines supply chain.

A UK Government consultation on the implementation of the FMD will be released shortly. The consultation and accompanying impact assessment will focus on where the UK has the scope to legislate making use of the flexibilities. The number of dispensing points that will need to have FMD compliant IT systems in place by February 2019 is dependent on the outcome of the consultation.

5th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department is taking with the Treasury to implement value-based healthcare into plans for health and social care services.

The Department of Health and Social Care and HM Treasury discuss with National Health Service bodies on a regular basis how to improve value for patients and taxpayers in the commissioning and delivery of NHS services. A number of measures are in place, including NHS RightCare, an NHS England supported programme to ensure the best possible care is delivered as efficiently as possible. NHS RightCare has been rolled out across local health economies in England, with all clinical commissioning groups having a dedicated Delivery Partner to help support and implement the RightCare approach.

5th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether it is his Department’s policy that commissioners can consider the full (a) economic, (b) social and (c) population health value of a health service intervention and not only its acquisition cost when making a commissioning decision; and what guidance his Department has issued to support such decision making.

The National Health Service needs to be able to deliver the right care, in the right place, with optimal value. Commissioners must consider the interests of patients when making commissioning decisions, not only the financial cost of commissioning a particular service.

Guidance is available to support clinical commissioning groups. In September 2016, NHS England and NHS Improvement published the NHS Operational Planning and Contracting Guidance 2017-19. Subsequent refresher guidance has also been published. In March 2018, NHS England also published updated guidance on planning, assuring and delivering service change for patients. NHS RightCare is a national NHS England-supported programme committed to delivering the best care to patients, making the NHS’s money go as far as possible and improving patient outcomes.

5th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department is taking to support greater collaboration between GP surgeries and community pharmacies to ensure the optimal usage of medicines at primary care level.

NHS England is supporting the development of primary care networks through which local providers of primary care, including general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacies, collaborate to better integrate services for patients. In addition, through the Pharmacy Integration Fund, NHS England is working to better utilise the skills and expertise of pharmacy teams to improve clinical effectiveness and reduce demand on GPs and other parts of primary care system.

To support this, regional pharmacy integration events are being planned to run through 2018. These events will bring together Sustainable Transformation Leads, pharmacy providers and wider stakeholders to promote collaboration and consider how community pharmacies can be better utilised to support people to stay well in the community.

5th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of the potential contribution of community pharmacies to building long term value in the health and social care system at the (a) local and (b) primary care level.

Ministers recognise the important contribution that community pharmacies already make and also that they have so much more to offer. Ministers see community pharmacy playing an enhanced role in the health and care of our country with pharmacy teams supported to do more to help people stay well in the community, and in doing so helping to reduce the demand on other parts of the system, including primary care.

In particular, the Government has been piloting the use of community pharmacies to support urgent care and the management of minor illness in the community. Alongside public awareness campaigns promoting pharmacy as a first port of call for a wide range of minor health concerns, the Digital Minor Illness Referral Service directs patients into community pharmacy from NHS 111 Online and the NHS 111 phone line. The impact of this work is being evaluated and will be carefully considered by Ministers.

In addition to this, over 9,000 community pharmacies are registered Healthy Living Pharmacies, proactively delivering lifestyle advice and promoting wellbeing and self-care to people in the community. This is an important resource that local teams can commission to deliver a wide range of services to meet the unique needs of their local population.

5th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps he is taking to ensure that the UK takes a global leadership role in tackling antimicrobial resistance.

The United Kingdom has taken a strong global leadership role in the course of the current Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) Strategy 2013-2018. This includes advocating for sustained political commitment and financial investment at the highest levels of multilateral fora including the European Union, the G7 and the G20. The UK also continues to provide support to the World Health Organization (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organisation and the World Organisation for Animal Health, challenging them and other United Nations agencies and international organisations to deliver an ambitious, robust and joined-up response which aligns with the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda and the Global Action Plan on AMR.

The UK was instrumental in drafting and gaining support for a UN political declaration on AMR, which was agreed by 193 UN member states at the UN General Assembly in September 2016. Alongside this political agreement, the UK co-hosted a side event where over £600 million was committed by countries for AMR research and development. To ensure progress of the 2016 UN Resolution, the Interagency Coordination Group (IACG) on AMR was established, with the UK’s Chief Medical Officer, providing pivotal momentum as an expert member and co-convener in her independent capacity. The IACG is due to report to the UN Secretary General in summer 2019.

Since the beginning of the current strategy in 2013, the UK Government has committed over £615 million in delivering domestic and international programmes to tackle AMR, including the Fleming Fund (£265 million) and the Global AMR Innovation Fund (£50 million). These programmes focus on supporting low- and middle-income countries to combat AMR in humans, animals and the environment `by supporting countries to implement comprehensive AMR National Action Plans and by leveraging investment and expertise from around the world. The Department also works with its executive agencies to combat AMR at the global level. For instance, Public Health England provides specialist training programmes internationally and is on the steering group of the WHO-hosted Global AMR Surveillance System.

The UK also continues to work with international agencies to ensure we effectively manage the risks of AMR in the environment. For instance, the UK worked with EU partners to develop the ‘AMR in the environment’ resolution at the UN Environment Assembly in December 2017.

4th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what the timetable is for the publication of an updated five year antimicrobial resistance strategy.

Work is underway across Government, the devolved administrations and a wide range of stakeholders to develop a refreshed United Kingdom antimicrobial resistance strategy. Publication is planned by the end of the year.

4th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to SMI B 37: Investigation of blood cultures (for organisms other than Mycobacterium species), if he will make it his policy that each microbiology laboratory in the NHS undertakes an audit of their blood culture pathway to ensure effective antibiotic stewardship.

United Kingdom Standards for Microbiology Investigations (UK SMIs) B 37: Investigation of blood cultures (for organisms other than Mycobacterium species) are developed by the UK SMI Working Groups under the auspices of Public Health England. SMI B 37 describes the processing and microbiological investigation of blood cultures and aims to set standards for each stage of the investigative process. These can then be used as a benchmark to audit against by certification and accreditation bodies if they wish.

The UK SMIs are not mandatory and there is no legal obligation to follow the recommendations in UK SMIs. In using UK SMIs, laboratories should take account of local requirements and undertake additional investigations where appropriate.

UK SMIs are National Institute for Health and Care Excellence accredited and represent a good standard of practice. NHS England has included compliance with UK SMIs in the National Health Service Standard Contract 2017-18.

4th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to the Answer of 23 January 2018 to Question 123567, if he will encourage the owners of pharmacies not meeting the standards set by the General Pharmaceutical Council to adopt technology for reducing inadvertent dispensing errors as part of their action plans to improve the services they provide and safeguard the health, safety and well-being of patients and the public.

The Department has not made any recent assessment of the level of uptake or adoption of technology for reducing inadvertent dispensing errors in pharmacies or acute settings.

There are many ways to reduce the incidence of near misses and errors, and the solution to responding to these will vary depending on the nature of the error. The professionalism of the pharmacy workforce and robust systems of governance are the first line of defence in preventing dispensing errors. New technologies, such as the as electronic prescribing, the electronic prescription service, auto-mated dispensing and barcode scanning are being adopted by pharmacy teams, which will further help reduce risks of some types of dispensing errors.

All registered pharmacy professionals and registered pharmacies are required to meet the relevant standards set by the General Pharmaceutical Council. Documenting, reflecting and learning from near misses, dispensing errors or incidents is critical to compliance with the standards and ensuring that patients and the public receive safe and effective care from pharmacy.

4th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to the Answer of 23 April 2018 to Question 136485, what recent assessment he has made of the level of uptake and adoption of technology for reducing inadvertent dispensing errors in (a) pharmacies and (b) acute settings.

The Department has not made any recent assessment of the level of uptake or adoption of technology for reducing inadvertent dispensing errors in pharmacies or acute settings.

There are many ways to reduce the incidence of near misses and errors, and the solution to responding to these will vary depending on the nature of the error. The professionalism of the pharmacy workforce and robust systems of governance are the first line of defence in preventing dispensing errors. New technologies, such as the as electronic prescribing, the electronic prescription service, auto-mated dispensing and barcode scanning are being adopted by pharmacy teams, which will further help reduce risks of some types of dispensing errors.

All registered pharmacy professionals and registered pharmacies are required to meet the relevant standards set by the General Pharmaceutical Council. Documenting, reflecting and learning from near misses, dispensing errors or incidents is critical to compliance with the standards and ensuring that patients and the public receive safe and effective care from pharmacy.

4th Jun 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps he is taking to ensure the availability of (a) effective and (b) up to day diagnostic equipment with 24-hour remote communication facilities in the reorganisation of microbiology laboratory services in the NHS.

NHS Improvement is leading the transformational changes in pathology services across England, with the formation of 29 Pathology Networks serving England well underway. These networks will realise an improved quality of service, timely access to diagnostic results and access to expert clinical advice in this very diverse clinical specialty.

One of the most significant benefits of this reconfiguration will be to increase the availability of microbiology services, so vital in the diagnosis of life threatening conditions such as sepsis. Currently not all microbiology services are available 24/7 and access to state of the art equipment is variable.

The establishment of networked pathology services will allow for best practice to be deployed across trusts, not only allowing for 24/7 services and faster access to targeted treatment, but also ensuring the latest technology such as molecular genetic testing is available to more patients. To support this development, this year the Government announced £61.5 million to develop the laboratory and IT infrastructure needed to monitor and review results and systems from any point in the network.

NHS Improvement are also working closely with the Office of Life Sciences to ensure digitisation and deployment of artificial intelligence is built in to ensure maximum benefit to the National Health Service and patient outcomes as these technologies develop.

These transformational changes are being performed with the full engagement of the pathology professional bodies and working with the Department’s procurement category tower 8 to improve the purchasing power and choice of equipment to the NHS.

18th Apr 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the coming into force of the Preparation and Dispensing Errors (Registered Pharmacies) Order 2018 of the risk of pharmacists being prosecuted as a result of an inadvertent dispensing error.

There have been very few prosecutions in regard to preparation and dispensing errors made by pharmacists to date, and we expect the number to reduce even further. The fundamental premise on which this Order is based is that new defences for offences concerning dispensing errors will reduce the risk of prosecution, leading to an increase in the number of reported errors. Over time, learning from increased numbers of error reports is expected to lead to improvements in training and practices, which should reduce the number of errors made.

An Impact Assessment, published alongside the Order, records that there have only been three prosecutions by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency since 2003 and a similarly very low number by the Crown Prosecution Service and the Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland. No specific figure was given for the likely number of prosecutions in future, either for prosecution for the offences to which the defences relate or under the general criminal law. However, the Impact Assessment did seek to put a monetary value on the benefit from a reduced risk of prosecution and estimated a benefit to business of £565,770. The consultation responses supported this part of the analysis.

Whilst it is estimated this policy will result in a reduced risk of prosecution, in the most serious cases, for example where a dispensing error leads to the death of a patient, prosecution will continue to be possible under the general criminal law – for example for gross negligence manslaughter.

18th Jan 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of whether the failure to apply sanctions for standards for pharmacy premises has resulted in a disproportionate number of individual pharmacist registrants who have been held to account for professional standards which may have been impacted by the working environment created by pharmacy owners; and if he will make a statement.

The Department has not made any assessment of the effectiveness of the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) as a regulator of pharmacy professionals and pharmacy premises. The Professional Standards Authority, which in its review of the GPhC’s performance in 2016-2017, found that the GPhC had met all of the standards for good regulation, including all of the standards for fitness to practise.

Standards to safeguard the health, safety and wellbeing of patients and the public are set by the GPhC. It is important to note that there are very different legal frameworks for upholding these standards and how the regulator deals with these for pharmacy premises as compared to pharmacy professionals. 87% of the pharmacies inspected by the GPhC in 2016-17 were meeting all of the standards it sets. Any pharmacy not achieving all of the standards is required by the GPhC to implement an action plan to improve the services they provide. In this period the GPhC agreed 469 action plans with pharmacies to ensure they improved the services they provide, and 99% of them made the necessary improvements so that they were meeting all of the standards. In the same period 140 cases were made affecting an individual pharmacy professional’s registration.

18th Jan 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the General Pharmaceutical Council's enforcement of standards for registered pharmacy premises; whether he has made an assessment of the effect of failure to apply such standards to pharmacy owners rather than only pharmacy professionals on the safety of patients; and if he will make a statement.

The Department has not made any assessment of the effectiveness of the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) as a regulator of pharmacy professionals and pharmacy premises. The Professional Standards Authority, which in its review of the GPhC’s performance in 2016-2017, found that the GPhC had met all of the standards for good regulation, including all of the standards for fitness to practise.

Standards to safeguard the health, safety and wellbeing of patients and the public are set by the GPhC. It is important to note that there are very different legal frameworks for upholding these standards and how the regulator deals with these for pharmacy premises as compared to pharmacy professionals. 87% of the pharmacies inspected by the GPhC in 2016-17 were meeting all of the standards it sets. Any pharmacy not achieving all of the standards is required by the GPhC to implement an action plan to improve the services they provide. In this period the GPhC agreed 469 action plans with pharmacies to ensure they improved the services they provide, and 99% of them made the necessary improvements so that they were meeting all of the standards. In the same period 140 cases were made affecting an individual pharmacy professional’s registration.

17th Jan 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many Freedom to Speak up Guardians have been nominated in community pharmacies; and whether his Department holds information on names of those Guardians.

The Department does not hold information on the number or names of Freedom to Speak up Guardians in community pharmacies.

NHS England is responsible for issuing the guidance on Freedom to Speak Up in primary care and has provided the following response:

The number and names of Freedom to Speak Up Guardians in community pharmacies is not held centrally. Guidance for primary care providers was published in November 2016 on the NHS England website and a number of models for Freedom to Speak Up are detailed within that guidance, including having a named Guardian who is independent of the line management chain and not a direct employee. NHS England is working with the National Guardian's Office to assess the support that primary care providers, including community pharmacies, may need to comply with this guidance.

9th Jan 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what discussions he has had with representatives from (a) GPs, (b) patient organisations and (c) manufacturers on the availability of the new enhanced influenza vaccine for the over-65s for the 2017-18 and the 2018-19 season.

Officials at the Department and Public Health England have regular discussions with manufacturers on a range of issues. This has included discussion with Seqirus, the company that has produced the new adjuvanted trivalent flu vaccine (aTIV).

Officials have had no discussions with general practitioner representatives or patient groups on the aTIV.

Officials also attend meetings of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, which includes a lay member.

9th Jan 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the take-up of the new enhanced influenza vaccine for the over-65s by (i) GPs and (ii) pharmacies in the 2017-18 and 2018-19 influenza seasons.

The adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine was not available for use in 2017/18.

General practitioners (GPs) and pharmacies are responsible for ordering and purchasing flu vaccines for the adult seasonal flu programme (eligible individuals aged 18 years and over) directly from manufacturers.

Information on what vaccines are being ordered by these independent contractors is not routinely collected. Information on vaccines used by pharmacies and GPs will be available after the end of a flu season when practice/pharmacies claim reimbursement for the cost of the vaccines they have used.

9th Jan 2018
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what plans he has to encourage the take-up of the new enhanced influenza vaccine for the over-65s for the 2018-19 influenza season with GPs and pharmacies.

Public Health England has updated their advice in the Green Book chapter on influenza so that clinicians are aware of the advice of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation in relation to the adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine.

In addition, NHS England wrote to general practitioners and clinical commissioning groups (via NHS England local teams) in December 2017 to provide an update on the use of the adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine for 2018/19.

This update will also be made available to community pharmacies as part of confirming that the Advanced Influenza Vaccination service has been recommissioned in early 2018. Community pharmacies are able to order relevant vaccines as detailed in the service specification, including the enhanced vaccine for patients within the relevant cohort.

14th Nov 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans the Government has to develop a national strategy for self care.

The Five Year Forward View made a specific commitment to do more to support people with long term conditions manage their own health. Further to this, sustainability and transformation partnerships (STPs) have a remit to consider how to improve self-care.

In 2015 NHS England established the Realising the Value Programme. This was designed to identify evidence-based approaches that engage people in their own health and care and develop practical tools to support implementation. The programme has now published tools and guidance for local health economies, as well as an economic modelling tool to help services understand the costs and benefits.

NHS England is also rolling out the Patient Activation Measure (PAM). The PAM is a tool which captures the extent to which people feel engaged and confident in taking care of their health and wellbeing, helping professionals to tailor support. NHS England has agreed to grant 1.8 million people with long term conditions across 27 areas access to the tool.

Eight STP areas to take part in its new one year Building Health Partnerships programme supported by NHS England to facilitate strong engagement with the voluntary sector and local communities on actions that improve wellbeing and self-care. NHS England is also working with 15 new care models across the country to test how to deliver support for self-care, systematically and at scale. By working with the new care models, NHS England plans to offer tailored self-care support to 25,000 – 30,000 people by end of March 2018, delivered through health coaching/self-management education and social prescribing, supported by use of the PAM.

14th Nov 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many ambulance call outs were for type 3 conditions in (a) England and (b) each clinical commissioning group in each year since 2012.

This information is not held centrally.

13th Nov 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the range of illnesses included in type three attendances to accident and emergency departments; and if he will make a statement.

There has been no such assessment.

10th Nov 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps the Government is taking to encourage clinical commissioning groups and local authorities to participate in national Self Care Week 2017 in order to empower people to look after their own health better.

NHS England has worked alongside the Self Care Forum to promote Self Care Week across the National Health Service, including showcasing best practice on social media. References can be found to the campaign both via NHS Choices and on NHS England’s on-going winter campaign, Stay Well this Winter. Links can be found below:

www.nhs.uk/selfcare/Pages/self-care-week-2017.aspx

www.nhs.uk/staywell/#SoKX6vgcUb035h8m.97

10th Nov 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the potential savings that self care for self-treatable conditions can achieve in (a) general practice and (b) A&E.

There is a growing body of evidence for the benefits of self-care both in improved patient outcomes and reductions in demand on the National Health Service. ‘Self-care’ covers a broad spectrum of interventions and is defined in different ways in different situations. We do not hold national data on the potential savings linked directly to self-care.

10th Nov 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the effect of minor ailment schemes in community pharmacies on the costs associated with a reduction in the number of GP consultations as a result of those schemes; and if he will make a statement.

NHS England and clinical commissioning groups commission minor ailment services from community pharmacies to meet local need. These services have been developed in areas of high demand on general practices, to treat minor illnesses and are reviewed locally by the commissioner of the service.

Whilst the Government has not made an assessment of the impact of the costs associated with a reduction in the number of general practitioners consultations, Monitor in its publication in 2013 “Closing the NHS Funding Gap – How to get Better Value Healthcare for Patients” estimated that with a 1% uptake of pharmacy-led minor ailments schemes nationally, £64 million could be saved.

10th Nov 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what proportion of visits to (a) A&E and (b) general practice were type three attendances in (i) England, (ii) each NHS trust and (iii) each clinical commissioning Group in each of the last two years.

Information is not available in the format requested. However, the attached table provides the total number of accident and emergency attendances and the proportion of those at ‘type 3’1 sites, for England and by provider for the period November 2015 to October 2017. These data are not broken down at general practice or clinical commissioning group level.

Note:

1‘Type 3’ sites include a range of facilities such as hospitals and other sites, including walk-in centres and urgent care centres, that can be general practitioner-led.

6th Oct 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, when his Department plans to respond to the Murray review of community pharmacy; and if he will make a statement.

NHS England commissioned the Murray review and is now actively progressing transformation of pharmacy practice and working with the pharmacy professions to improve the quality and efficiency of services in line with many of the recommendations set out in the Review. This includes:

- An increased focus on improving value and outcomes from medicines.

- Measures to promote pharmacist and pharmacy technician integration in primary care settings, making the most of their clinical skills, supported by the Pharmacy Integration Fund (PhIF).

Some examples of the actions underway as part of this include:

- Programmes to deploy pharmacists and pharmacy technicians in integrated multi-disciplinary teams to carry out medicines optimisation and relieve the pressures on general practitioner practices and hospital admissions, funded by the PhIF and with evaluation in place. These include recruiting pharmacists to work in the Integrated Urgent Care Clinical Assessment Service contact centres and NHS 111 services, and the ongoing development of a care homes medicines optimisation scheme to tackle inappropriate polypharmacy.

- A programme of education and development is being developed in collaboration with Health Education England to support this transformation. This will include access to post-registration training and development for community pharmacists, equivalent to 1,000 postgraduate diplomas a year up to 2019, a new training pathway for pharmacists who work in care homes and integrated urgent care hubs/NHS 111, and independent prescribing qualifications for up to 2,000 pharmacists.

- A digital medicines strategy for pharmacy to upgrade the digital infrastructure to support transformation.

- NHS England has set up four Regional Medicines Optimisation Committees, chaired by regional medical directors, which are working to ensure system wide medicines optimisation.

13th Mar 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will ask NHS England to publish the sources of data used by clinical reference groups when drawing up their recommendations.

The data used by the clinical reference groups in developing their recommendations on clinical commissioning policies includes clinical evidence reviews, stakeholder views which are gathered through initial stakeholder testing, and responses to the public consultation. The evidence reviews are published as part of the stakeholder and consultation testing.

13th Mar 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the oral contribution of Lord Prior of Brampton of 4 July 2016, House of Lords, Official Report, column 1828, on Public Health England being commissioned to update its evidence report on e-cigarettes annually until the end of the current Parliament, when Public Health England plans to publish its next evidence report.

The Department is working closely with Public Health England (PHE) and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to encourage research into the use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and monitor the emerging evidence.

PHE’s next updated evidence report on e-cigarettes is expected to be published before the end of the 2017. In addition to the publication of an evidence review, PHE have partnered with Cancer Research UK and the UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies to develop a forum that brings together policy makers, researchers, practitioners and the non-governmental organisation representatives to discuss the emerging evidence, identify research priorities and generate ideas for new research projects, thereby enhancing collaboration between forum participants.

The MHRA will continue to undertake market surveillance of e-cigarettes as part of their role as the Competent Authority, feeding back any intelligence to the Department and PHE.

13th Mar 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps are being taken by (a) his Department, (b) the Medical and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency and (c) Public Health England to encourage research into the use of e-cigarettes.

The Department is working closely with Public Health England (PHE) and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to encourage research into the use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and monitor the emerging evidence.

PHE’s next updated evidence report on e-cigarettes is expected to be published before the end of the 2017. In addition to the publication of an evidence review, PHE have partnered with Cancer Research UK and the UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies to develop a forum that brings together policy makers, researchers, practitioners and the non-governmental organisation representatives to discuss the emerging evidence, identify research priorities and generate ideas for new research projects, thereby enhancing collaboration between forum participants.

The MHRA will continue to undertake market surveillance of e-cigarettes as part of their role as the Competent Authority, feeding back any intelligence to the Department and PHE.

13th Mar 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to page 122 of the NHS Atlas of Variation in Healthcare, published by Public Heath England in September 2016, what steps he is taking to encourage (a) clinical commissioning groups and (b) primary care clinicians to tackle variations in the provision of transcatheter aortic valve implantation procedures in (i) Rother Valley constituency and (ii) England.

The initial diagnosis and follow-up of those with heart valve disease across England is commissioned by clinical commissioning groups. NHS England is the commissioner of cardiac valve surgery and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI).

Service specifications and policy for the surgical and interventional treatment of heart valve disease are published by the NHS England Cardiac Clinical Reference Group (CRG), which is chaired by the National Clinical Director for Heart Disease, Professor Huon Gray. These are important in clearly defining what NHS England expects to be in place for providers to offer evidence-based, safe and effective services.

NHS England hosted a Clinical Summit in June 2016, bringing together cardiologists and cardiac surgeons and commissioners to examine the issues relating to aortic valve disease, including variations in provision. The outputs from this meeting are now part of the CRG work plan and will be likely be part of a national cardiac review in 2017/18. This will support the review of current clinical commissioning policy, will seek to address variation, clinical and cost-effectiveness and inform the future commissioning position.

TAVI has been demonstrated to be an effective intervention and the reasons for increase in demand and variation are multifactorial. The CRG have agreed that a review of the wider aortic stenosis pathway will be an appropriate way to address the issues. This will include the medical therapy and traditional surgical pathway and will include specialist centres, secondary care and primary care clinicians.

In relation to the Rother Valley, a review of variation in implant rates for TAVI was undertaken by the Yorkshire and Humber specialised commissioning hub. This has resulted in the commissioning of an additional centre to extend access.

13th Mar 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many people at NHS England are working on the development of NHS England's updated regime for the second phase of device procurement.

There are currently two NHS England clinicians (who have other roles) working on the development of NHS England's updated regime for the second phase of device procurement, plus 0.2 staff (whole time equivalent) of clinical support. They will be joined by clinicians from the Clinical Reference Group and provider organisations once the evaluation process has started.

21st Feb 2017
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what data (a) Clinical Reference Groups and (b) the Prescribed Specialised Services Advisory Group are required to collect and consider in the course of making their decisions.

When making decisions the Prescribed Specialised Services Advisory Group (PSSAG) must consider four factors:

- the number of individuals who require the provision of the service or facility;

- the cost of providing the service or facility;

- the number of persons able to provide the service or facility; and

- the financial implications for clinical commissioning groups if they were required to arrange for the provision of the service or facility.

PSSAG therefore requests that any proposals put forward for its consideration include data which supports informed decision making in these areas. If the group does not feel that there is sufficient data to reach a decision, it may request further information to enable it to do so at a later date. More information can be found at the following address:

https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/prescribed-specialised-services-advisory-group-pssag

Clinical Reference Groups (CRGs) are not decision making groups.

However CRGs collate a large amount of data to consider when providing their clinical advice and utilise when making recommendations relating to commissioning.

From a clinical commissioning policy perspective, CRGs gather and analyse data and intelligence that is relevant to the treatment proposal they are considering, such as Individual Funding Request activity, a summary of clinical evidence and related trial statistics. They would consider prevalence and incidence data sources, search clinical databases and registries for relevant data and collect data on clinical outcomes and clinical quality aspects. The CRG would also take account of patient experience information and relevant financial information.

Similar data sources would also be used to support the development of service specifications and to inform the work on service reviews.

10th Oct 2016
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment his Department has made of the potential effect of proposed reductions in the level of community pharmacy funding on the adequacy of provision of pharmaceutical advice and reassurance to members of the public.

The Government’s proposals for community pharmacy in 2016/17 and beyond, on which we have consulted, are being considered against the public sector equality duty, the family test and the relevant duties of my Rt. hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health, under the National Health Service Act 2006.

Our assessments include consideration of the potential impacts on the adequate provision of NHS pharmaceutical services, including the supply of medicines, access to NHS pharmaceutical services, supplementary hours, non-commissioned services, individuals with protected characteristics, impacts on other NHS services, health inequalities, individuals with restricted mobility and access to healthcare for deprived communities.

An impact assessment will be completed to inform final decisions and published in due course.

Our proposals are about improving services for patients and the public and securing efficiencies and savings. We believe these efficiencies can be made within community pharmacy without compromising the quality of services or public access to them.

Our aim is to ensure that those community pharmacies upon which people depend continue to thrive. We are consulting on the introduction of a Pharmacy Access Scheme, which will provide more NHS funds to certain pharmacies compared with others, considering factors such as location and the health needs of the local population.

We want a clinically focussed community pharmacy service that is better integrated with primary care and public health in line with the Five Year Forward View. This will help relieve the pressure on general practitioners and accident and emergency departments, ensure better use of medicines and better patient outcomes, and contribute to delivering seven day health and care services.

The Chief Pharmaceutical Officer for England, Dr Keith Ridge has commissioned an independent review of community pharmacy clinical services. The review is being led by Richard Murray, Director of Policy at The King’s Fund. The final recommendations will be considered as part of the development of clinical and cost effective patient care by pharmacists and their teams.

NHS England is also setting up a Pharmacy Integration Fund to support the development of clinical pharmacy practice in a wider range of primary care settings, resulting in a more integrated and effective NHS primary care patient pathway.

The rollout of the additional 1,500 clinical pharmacists announced by NHS England will help to ease current pressures in general practice by working with patients who have long term conditions and others with multiple medications. Having a pharmacist on site will mean that patients who receive care from their general practice will be able to benefit from the expertise in medicines that these pharmacists provide.

10th Oct 2016
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment his Department has made of the potential effect of proposed reductions in the level of community pharmacy funding on the support available for frail and elderly people to live independently in their own homes.

The Government’s proposals for community pharmacy in 2016/17 and beyond, on which we have consulted, are being considered against the public sector equality duty, the family test and the relevant duties of my Rt. hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health, under the National Health Service Act 2006.

Our assessments include consideration of the potential impacts on the adequate provision of NHS pharmaceutical services, including the supply of medicines, access to NHS pharmaceutical services, supplementary hours, non-commissioned services, individuals with protected characteristics, impacts on other NHS services, health inequalities, individuals with restricted mobility and access to healthcare for deprived communities.

An impact assessment will be completed to inform final decisions and published in due course.

Our proposals are about improving services for patients and the public and securing efficiencies and savings. We believe these efficiencies can be made within community pharmacy without compromising the quality of services or public access to them.

Our aim is to ensure that those community pharmacies upon which people depend continue to thrive. We are consulting on the introduction of a Pharmacy Access Scheme, which will provide more NHS funds to certain pharmacies compared with others, considering factors such as location and the health needs of the local population.

We want a clinically focussed community pharmacy service that is better integrated with primary care and public health in line with the Five Year Forward View. This will help relieve the pressure on general practitioners and accident and emergency departments, ensure better use of medicines and better patient outcomes, and contribute to delivering seven day health and care services.

The Chief Pharmaceutical Officer for England, Dr Keith Ridge has commissioned an independent review of community pharmacy clinical services. The review is being led by Richard Murray, Director of Policy at The King’s Fund. The final recommendations will be considered as part of the development of clinical and cost effective patient care by pharmacists and their teams.

NHS England is also setting up a Pharmacy Integration Fund to support the development of clinical pharmacy practice in a wider range of primary care settings, resulting in a more integrated and effective NHS primary care patient pathway.

The rollout of the additional 1,500 clinical pharmacists announced by NHS England will help to ease current pressures in general practice by working with patients who have long term conditions and others with multiple medications. Having a pharmacist on site will mean that patients who receive care from their general practice will be able to benefit from the expertise in medicines that these pharmacists provide.

6th Jul 2016
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the (a) extent of the implementation of the Making Every Contact Count initiative by clinical commissioning groups and local authorities and (b) adequacy of training provided to staff to equip them to provide consistent self-care messages during consultations; and if he will make a statement.

Public Health England, Health Education England (HEE) and NHS England are collaborating with local authorities and National Health Service partners to support local uptake of the Making Every Contact Count (MECC) approach building on the many examples of implementation such as from Warwickshire, Medway and Wigan. Activities to support the commissioning, development and delivery of effective local training have been undertaken.

To support MECC uptake by clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and local authorities a provider requirement now exists within the NHS Standard Contract; and NHS England’s person-centred care Commissioning for Quality and Innovation for CCGs includes workforce skills that support the local MECC offer. The national MECC advisory group is linking with HEE’s national workforce programme and NHS England’s New Models of Care and Self-Care teams to support and equip the workforce with person centred skills to support and enable self-care and behaviour change. HEE has regional events to support MECC implementation activity across the Sustainable Transformation Plan footprints.

4th Jul 2016
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will adopt the recommendations of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Primary Care and Public Health in its Inquiry Report into NHS England's Five Year Forward View: behaviour change, information and signposting, published in March 2016, that reports of self-care pilots and evidence-based initiatives in the NHS should be sent to the Self Care Forum for upload to its best practice portal.

The Self Care Forum was established in 2011 to further the reach of self-care and embed it into everyday life. Local organisations involved in self care pilots and evidence based initiatives are free to send their findings to the Self Care Forum as recommended in the All Party Parliamentary Group’s Report, should they wish to do so.

The Five Year Forward View set out how the health service needs to change, with an improved relationship between patients and communities. It made a specific commitment to do more to support people with long-term conditions to help them manage their own health.

To support this commitment, NHS England established the Realising the Value Programme to help to build an evidence base about what works best for different patients, how much extra resource may be needed to support the growth of services locally and which approaches, if any, are demonstrably cost effective. Additionally, NHS England announced that a consortium led by Nesta and the Health Foundation in partnership with Voluntary Voices (National Voices, Regional Voices, National Association for Voluntary and Community Action and Community Service Volunteers), the Behavioural Insights Team and Newcastle University, had been selected to take forward this work.

Nesta is also seeking to learn from and build on existing toolkits and learning resources and has worked to collate examples. These are hosted on the Nesta website at the following link:

www.nesta.org.uk/realising-value-resource-centre

13th Jan 2016
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to substitute the prescribing of high volume branded medicine with generic equivalents.

Generic substitution has happened in secondary care for many years, but is not currently permitted in primary care. The Department consulted on introducing primary care generic substitution in 2010, but did not progress the proposals following concerns about the potential impact on patient safety.


Most general practitioner practices and clinical commissioning groups, formerly primary care trusts, have been pursuing and supporting policies of increasing generic prescribing for 15 years or more. Generic prescribing rates are already relatively high in England at 84.1% in 2014, as reported in the Health and Social Care Information Centre report: Prescriptions dispensed in the community: England 2004-14.

George Freeman
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
13th Jan 2016
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the potential annual savings to the NHS through greater generic substitution compared to using their reference originator products; and what assessment he has made of the obstacles to implementing such a policy for (a) inhalers and biologics and (b) after complex products.

The Government has made no such assessments. England has one of the highest levels of generic prescribing in Europe. In 2014, the Health & Social Care Information Centre report Prescriptions Dispensed in the community: England 2004-14, shows that of all medicines dispensed in 2014, 84.1% were dispensed generically.


Prescribers are ultimately responsible for their own prescribing decisions. We expect them to always satisfy themselves that the medicines they consider appropriate for their patients can be safely prescribed and that patients are adequately monitored.

George Freeman
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
13th Jan 2016
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions he has had with the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency about the requirement for some generic medicines to be given a brand name for clinical reasons; and what steps he is taking to ensure patients receive the brand name medicine specified.

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is the Executive Agency of Department of Health with overall responsibility for medicines licensing.


The responsibility for prescribing rests with the practitioner who has clinical responsibility for their patient's care and we would expect practitioners to take any relevant guidance into account when making their prescribing decisions.Prescribers utilise a wide range of information to inform their prescribing decisions including decision support systems and authoritative guidance such as that from the MHRA, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the British National Formulary.


In primary care, if it is clinically appropriate for an individual patient to be maintained on a specific manufacturer’s product then the prescriber can specify this on the prescription for that product to be dispensed. Officials from the Department and MHRA liaise as required on the application of this policy.

George Freeman
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
13th Jan 2016
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to include generic medicines which are required to have a brand name by the MHRA and are already subject to market competition alongside originator medicines in the Statutory Scheme of Control the Prices of Branded Health Service Medicines.

The Department consulted on options to amend the Statutory Scheme regulations which control the prices of branded health service medicines. Both the voluntary Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme and the statutory scheme include all health service medicines with a brand name, including those required by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency to have a brand name. The Department did not propose any changes to the scope of the statutory scheme in this respect and has not made an estimate of the cost of removing those branded medicines from the statutory scheme.


The Department received responses from a range of organisations including National Health Service, independent bodies and pharmaceutical industry. The Department is currently analysing the responses from a range of organisations including NHS, independent bodies and pharmaceutical industry.


The consultation and impact assessment can be accessed using the following link.


https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/pricing-of-branded-health-service-medicines

George Freeman
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
13th Jan 2016
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the cost to the NHS of removing generic medicines required to have a brand name by the MHRA from the Statutory Scheme of Control the Prices of Branded Health Service Medicines.

The Department consulted on options to amend the Statutory Scheme regulations which control the prices of branded health service medicines. Both the voluntary Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme and the statutory scheme include all health service medicines with a brand name, including those required by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency to have a brand name. The Department did not propose any changes to the scope of the statutory scheme in this respect and has not made an estimate of the cost of removing those branded medicines from the statutory scheme.


The Department received responses from a range of organisations including National Health Service, independent bodies and pharmaceutical industry. The Department is currently analysing the responses from a range of organisations including NHS, independent bodies and pharmaceutical industry.


The consultation and impact assessment can be accessed using the following link.


https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/pricing-of-branded-health-service-medicines

George Freeman
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
17th Sep 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the role of community pharmacies in keeping people healthy.

We have long recognised that community pharmacy teams play a vital role in improving people’s health, preventing ill-health and helping to reduce health inequalities. Informed by a growing evidence base, we have enabled community pharmacy to deliver a wide range of public health services. We have actively supported the implementation of Healthy Living Pharmacies, with qualified health champions on site reaching out to, and improving the health of, people in their communities.

Public Health England (PHE) keeps under review the progress that pharmacy is making on keeping people healthy and is providing system leadership for pharmacy’s public health role and strategic leadership for the acceleration and spread of Healthy Living Pharmacies across the country. PHE’s vision for pharmacy is one in which community pharmacy teams are fully integrated into the local primary care networks, playing an appropriate and pivotal role in improving the health of people in England. PHE has built a strong relationship with the sector, seeking to utilise its unique offering of access, location and an informal environment, with trusted staff that reflect the background of the communities that they serve. PHE is embedding pharmacy in its priority public health programmes such as prevention, early detection and management of blood pressure, NHS Health Checks and smoking cessation.

15th Jul 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the effect of his Department's plans for the decriminalisation of dispensing errors on the number of cases brought annually against pharmacists for such errors.

The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.

A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:

- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015

- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015

The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.

While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:

- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;

- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and

- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.

Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.

A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.

There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.

15th Jul 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether the inadvertent mislabelling of medicines will remain an offence following the Government's legislation to decriminalise dispensing errors.

The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.

A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:

- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015

- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015

The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.

While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:

- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;

- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and

- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.

Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.

A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.

There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.

15th Jul 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to amend section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968, as it relates to medicines labelling, in legislation to decriminalise errors made by pharmacists.

The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.

A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:

- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015

- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015

The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.

While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:

- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;

- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and

- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.

Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.

A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.

There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.

15th Jul 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will take steps to exclude pharmacists from sanctions resulting from genuine dispensing errors and medicine labelling errors.

The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.

A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:

- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015

- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015

The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.

While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:

- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;

- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and

- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.

Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.

A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.

There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.

15th Jul 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the effect of section 85 of the Medicines Act on the willingness of pharmacists to report dispensing errors; and if he will make a statement.

The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.

A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:

- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015

- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015

The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.

While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:

- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;

- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and

- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.

Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.

A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.

There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.

15th Jul 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to amend the law on labelling of medicines in order to decriminalise dispensing errors.

The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.

A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:

- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015

- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015

The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.

While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:

- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;

- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and

- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.

Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.

A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.

There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.

15th Jul 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to consult further with pharmacy representative bodies before bringing forward legislative proposals to decriminalise dispensing errors made by pharmacists.

The programme board for “rebalancing” medicines legislation and pharmacy regulation is tasked with examining the respective scope of legislation and regulation, and the interface between them, with a view to ensuring these are optimally designed to provide safety for users of pharmacy services, while facilitating and reducing the barriers to responsible development of practice, innovation and a systematic approach to quality in pharmacy. Members of the board, from across the United Kingdom, include representatives from the pharmacy regulators, the professional bodies for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, pharmacy owners, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the various sectors of practice and patients and the public.

A UK wide consultation, issued on behalf of the four UK Health Departments, ran from 12 February to 14 May 2015. It sought comments and views on two pharmacy related draft Orders being made under the powers in section 60 of the Health Act 1999. The two pharmacy-related draft Orders are:

- The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015

- The Pharmacy (Premises Standards, Information Obligations, etc.) Order 2015

The responses to the consultation were supportive of the proposals and included many from individual pharmacy professionals (registered pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians), as well as pharmacy representative bodies, health organisations, patients and the public and others. A report will be published in due course and recommendations made to ministers on next steps.

While retaining the criminal sanction the draft section 60 Order entitled ‘The Pharmacy (Preparation and Dispensing Errors) Order 2015’ provides:

- a defence to prosecution under section 63 (adulteration of medicinal products) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are prepared by a registered pharmacist or a registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist;

- a defence to prosecution under section 64 (medicinal products not of the nature or quality ordered) of the Medicines Act 1968, in cases of errors where medicines are dispensed by a registered pharmacist or registered pharmacy technician, or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist; and

- the conditions to be met if the new defences are to apply.

Criminal sanctions will remain in place for dispensing errors falling outside the proposed defences, for example, where pharmacy professionals do not act in the course of their profession by using their professional skills for an improper purpose or deliberately failing to have due regard for patient safety. General criminal law may also apply.

A draft impact assessment was published alongside the consultation on dispensing errors. This will be updated, taking account of the consultation responses.

There was an error made in the transposition of section 85 of the Medicines Act 1968 in part into regulation 269 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 during consolidation of medicines legislation. A legislative amendment has now been made, which came into force on 1 July 2015, to restore the effect of the original provisions which existed in section 85(5) of Medicines Act 1968, such that the labelling offence applies to businesses and not individuals, such as pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps he is taking to ensure that the UK takes a global leadership role in tackling antimicrobial resistance.

The United Kingdom has taken a strong global leadership role in the course of the current Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) Strategy 2013-2018. This includes advocating for sustained political commitment and financial investment at the highest levels of multilateral fora including the European Union, the G7 and the G20. The UK also continues to provide support to the World Health Organization (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organisation and the World Organisation for Animal Health, challenging them and other United Nations agencies and international organisations to deliver an ambitious, robust and joined-up response which aligns with the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda and the Global Action Plan on AMR.

The UK was instrumental in drafting and gaining support for a UN political declaration on AMR, which was agreed by 193 UN member states at the UN General Assembly in September 2016. Alongside this political agreement, the UK co-hosted a side event where over £600 million was committed by countries for AMR research and development. To ensure progress of the 2016 UN Resolution, the Interagency Coordination Group (IACG) on AMR was established, with the UK’s Chief Medical Officer, providing pivotal momentum as an expert member and co-convener in her independent capacity. The IACG is due to report to the UN Secretary General in summer 2019.

Since the beginning of the current strategy in 2013, the UK Government has committed over £615 million in delivering domestic and international programmes to tackle AMR, including the Fleming Fund (£265 million) and the Global AMR Innovation Fund (£50 million). These programmes focus on supporting low- and middle-income countries to combat AMR in humans, animals and the environment `by supporting countries to implement comprehensive AMR National Action Plans and by leveraging investment and expertise from around the world. The Department also works with its executive agencies to combat AMR at the global level. For instance, Public Health England provides specialist training programmes internationally and is on the steering group of the WHO-hosted Global AMR Surveillance System.

The UK also continues to work with international agencies to ensure we effectively manage the risks of AMR in the environment. For instance, the UK worked with EU partners to develop the ‘AMR in the environment’ resolution at the UN Environment Assembly in December 2017.

26th Nov 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what steps his Department is taking to help bring Israeli and Palestinian leaders back to peace talks.

The UK is fully supporting US-led efforts, working with the Egyptians, to bring Israeli and Palestinian leaders back to negotiations aimed at achieving a lasting peace. We are also working with European partners, especially France and Germany, to support that US-led process.
29th Oct 2014
To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what meetings the Exchequer Secretary has had with representatives of the tobacco industry since his appointment.

A record of Ministerial meetings is published and updated periodically on the government website. For Treasury Ministers, this is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/hmt-ministers-meetings-hospitality-gifts-and-overseas-travel

Priti Patel
Home Secretary