Asked by: Tonia Antoniazzi (Labour - Gower)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will make an assessment of the potential impact of the replacement of the term females with the term individuals with child-bearing potential in Schedule 2 of the Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations 2017 on (a) clinical staff and patients’ understanding of those Regulations and (b) patient care in sex-specific healthcare settings.
Answered by Andrew Gwynne - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
A review of the Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations (IR(ME)R) 2017 concluded in 2023. Following consultation with expert groups, including the UK Health Security Agency, United Kingdom medical regulators, and professional bodies, the review found that there was no evidence that use of the term ‘individuals with child-bearing potential’ in the regulations was leading to misinterpretation. The Government is clear that it expects all health services, including medical exposure procedures, to be delivered in line with the Equality Act 2010.
Asked by: Tonia Antoniazzi (Labour - Gower)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will make an assessment of the potential impact of gender-neutral language in (a) pregnancy services and (b) other sex-specific areas of healthcare on the standard of health care services provided to patients.
Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
There are no plans to make an assessment. The Government is clear that it expects health services to be delivered in line with the Equality Act 2010.
Asked by: Tonia Antoniazzi (Labour - Gower)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether he plans to provide £400 million for (a) employment support and (b) resources for (i) musculoskeletal and (ii) mental health services.
Answered by Andrew Gwynne - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Long-term sickness continues to be the most common reason for economic inactivity among the working age population, now standing at 2.8 million. The two main causes contributing to sickness absence are mental health and musculoskeletal conditions, with the latter responsible for an estimated 23.4 million days of sickness absence in 2022.
Improving health and good work outcomes for people who live with musculoskeletal and mental health conditions forms a key part of the Government’s missions to kickstart economic growth and build a National Health Service fit for the future.
The Government is committed to supporting disabled people and people with health conditions, with a range of support available to enable individuals to get into and remain in work. Measures include joining up health and employment support around the individual through WorkWell, Employment Advisors in NHS Talking Therapies, and Individual Placement and Support in Primary Care, as well as support from Work Coaches, Disability Employment Advisers in Jobcentres, and Access to Work grants.
Asked by: Tonia Antoniazzi (Labour - Gower)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether he plans to provide £400 million for scaling up musculoskeletal hubs.
Answered by Andrew Gwynne - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Improving health and good work outcomes for the 20 million people in the United Kingdom who live with musculoskeletal l conditions forms a key part of the Government’s missions to kickstart economic growth and build a National Health Service fit for the future.
The Government is currently exploring options to support these missions and those who experience musculoskeletal conditions. Decisions on the scaling up of musculoskeletal hubs will be taken as the work of the missions progresses and through the usual Spending Review processes.
Asked by: Tonia Antoniazzi (Labour - Gower)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential merits of making Proleukin available for motor neurone disease patients on the NHS.
Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
We have made no assessment. It is critical that medicines used in the United Kingdom are safe and effective and as such, medicines cannot be marketed in the UK without a marketing authorisation. These are granted by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) which assesses all medicines with regard to their quality, safety, and effectiveness. Proleukin (interleukin-2, Aldesleukin) has not been licensed by the MHRA as a treatment for motor neurone disease. It is the responsibility of the company to apply to the MHRA for a relevant marketing authorisation. Should an application for it be received, the MHRA will consider this accordingly.
In England, newly licensed medicines are also appraised by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to determine whether they represent a clinically and cost-effective use of National Health Service resources. If the manufacturer of Proleukin seeks a licence from the MHRA for the treatment of motor neurone disease, then the NICE may consider it through the Technology Appraisal programme.
Asked by: Tonia Antoniazzi (Labour - Gower)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether he has had discussions with his counterparts in (a) Scotland, (b) Wales and (c) Northern Ireland on access to Enhertu for patients with HER2-low breast cancer.
Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
My Rt hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, spoke with his counterparts in Scotland and Wales on his first full day in office and will continue to engage with them on a regular basis. However decisions on the availability of individual treatments to National Health Service patients in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are for the devolved administrations so he has therefore had no discussions about the availability of Enhertu for HER2-low breast cancer with his counterparts.
Asked by: Tonia Antoniazzi (Labour - Gower)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether he has made representations to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence on the availability of Enhertu for patients with HER2-low breast cancer.
Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) makes recommendations on whether new medicines should be routinely funded by the National Health Service in England independently on the basis of the available evidence of costs and benefits and through engagement with the NHS, manufacturers, patient groups and other interested parties.
The Department regularly meets with colleagues in NICE to discuss a range of issues, including Enhertu for patients with HER2-low breast cancer. However, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Constitution and Functions) and the Health and Social Care Information Centre (Functions) Regulations 2013 provide that Ministers must not direct NICE as to the substance of its recommendations. These are very difficult decisions to make. NICE recognises that its decisions have important implications for patients and their families and only publishes final guidance on the use of a drug after a very careful consideration of the evidence and extensive engagement with interested parties including patients and clinicians. Therefore, it would not be appropriate for Ministers to intervene.
Asked by: Tonia Antoniazzi (Labour - Gower)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether she has made an assessment of the potential impact of increased rates of breastfeeding on cost savings for the NHS.
Answered by Andrea Leadsom
The public health benefits of breastfeeding for child and maternal health are significant and well established. Research published in the British Medical Journal suggests that increasing breastfeeding rates, both in terms of duration and exclusivity, is likely to generate substantial cost savings to the National Health Service, although the actual amounts saved will depend on the extent of this increase.
Through the Family Hubs and Start for Life Programme, we are investing £50 million to increase the range of specialist support, which is enabling more parents to access face-to-face and virtual support whenever they need it. One of the objectives of the programme is to improve the evidence base around the impact of breastfeeding interventions, and the specific combination of interventions that are effective in different circumstances. This is expected to strengthen the case for further, more widespread investment in the future.
Asked by: Tonia Antoniazzi (Labour - Gower)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what discussions she has had with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency on the average licensing approval decision timelines for (a) generic and (b) biosimilar medicines to treat Parkinson's disease.
Answered by Andrew Stephenson
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is taking urgent action to deliver improvements to decision timescales in established medicines, including those indicated to treat Parkinson’s disease. Last week we approved additional licences for this critical area. Whilst no specific discussions have taken place between the MHRA and my Rt hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on this matter, we are taking significant steps to assess applications for medicine approval within statutory timeframes and will always prioritise applications according to public health need.
We are working to reduce timelines by bringing in additional resources and developing processes that will result in significantly improved response times, while protecting patient safety. The measures we are putting in place are already resulting in significant improvements, and we will continue to publish monthly updates providing applicants with transparent information on expected timescales. As an effective regulator, we are committed to the highest of standards of performance and delivering the right outcomes for patients and public health.
Asked by: Tonia Antoniazzi (Labour - Gower)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether she is taking steps with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency to reduce the time taken to license (a) generic and (b) biosimilar medicines to treat Parkinson's disease.
Answered by Andrew Stephenson
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is taking urgent action to deliver improvements to decision timescales in established medicines, including those indicated to treat Parkinson’s disease. Last week we approved additional licences for this critical area. Whilst no specific discussions have taken place between the MHRA and my Rt hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on this matter, we are taking significant steps to assess applications for medicine approval within statutory timeframes and will always prioritise applications according to public health need.
We are working to reduce timelines by bringing in additional resources and developing processes that will result in significantly improved response times, while protecting patient safety. The measures we are putting in place are already resulting in significant improvements, and we will continue to publish monthly updates providing applicants with transparent information on expected timescales. As an effective regulator, we are committed to the highest of standards of performance and delivering the right outcomes for patients and public health.