Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps he is taking to help tackle the harm caused by sodium valproate to people in (a) England, (b) Warwickshire, and (c) Stratford-on-Avon.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Everyone who has been harmed from sodium valproate has our deepest sympathies.
The Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review, First Do No Harm, identified significant shortcomings in National Health Service care pathways for people harmed by sodium valproate, including fragmented services, limited diagnostic expertise, delays in diagnosis, and inequitable access to multidisciplinary care.
In response, NHS England has commissioned a Fetal Exposure to Medicines Services Pilot, being delivered by the NHS in Newcastle and Manchester. The pilot provides multidisciplinary diagnostic assessment and is informing the development of improved care pathways, better coordination of care, and reduced reliance on emergency care. Findings from the pilot will inform future decisions on the commissioning of services, subject to funding.
The Government is also carefully considering the Patient Safety Commissioner’s recommendations made in the Hughes Report, which includes proposed approaches to redress for those harmed by sodium valproate. I recently met the Patient Safety Commissioner to provide an update on the ongoing health initiatives led by the Department regarding sodium valproate and pelvic mesh, and agreed to providing an update on her report recommendations in due course.
Asked by: Alex Brewer (Liberal Democrat - North East Hampshire)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of retail sold magnets on the safety of cerebrospinal fluid shunts programmable externally by magnets.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is responsible for ensuring that medicines, medical devices, and blood components for transfusions on the market in the United Kingdom are safe, effective, and manufactured to the highest standards of quality. The Medical Devices Regulations 2002 (MDR 2002) establish the statutory framework that medical devices must meet in order to comply with these standards.
All medical devices, including cerebrospinal fluid shunts programmable externally by magnets, must comply with the MDR 2002, which include bearing the UKCA or CE marking on the packaging or labelling of the device. Manufacturers or their UK representatives must monitor use of these devices when used in the UK. The manufacturer holds the legal responsibility for obtaining the necessary certification and registering their medical devices with the MHRA, the UK Competent Authority. Higher risk medical devices are assessed and approved by Approved Bodies in the UK or Notified Bodies in the European Union.
As part of meeting the requirements of the regulations, manufacturers have to provide instructions which would include any special operating instructions, any warnings and/or precautions to take, and precautions to be taken as regards exposure, in reasonably foreseeable environmental conditions, to magnetic fields. In addition, some manufacturers provide further standalone information on this topic, an example of which is available at the following link:
Asked by: Stuart Anderson (Conservative - South Shropshire)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps he is taking to help restrict the sale of illegal prescription drugs online.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is responsible for the regulation of medicines for human use, medical devices, and blood products for transfusion in the United Kingdom. This includes applying the legal controls on the retail sale, supply, and advertising of medicines which are set out in the Human Medicines Regulations 2012.
Sourcing medicines from unregulated suppliers significantly increases the risk of getting a product which is either falsified or not authorised for use. Products purchased in this way will not meet the MHRA’s strict quality and safety standards and could expose patients to incorrect dosages or dangerous ingredients. The MHRA’s Criminal Enforcement Unit works hard to prevent, detect, and investigate illegal activity involving medicines and medical devices. It works closely with other health regulators, customs authorities, law enforcement agencies, and private sector partners, including e-commerce and the internet industry to identify, remove, and block online content promoting the illegal sale of medicines and medical devices.
The MHRA seeks to identify and, where appropriate, prosecute online sellers responsible for putting public health at risk. In 2025, the MHRA and its partners seized almost 20 million doses of illegally traded medicines with a street value of nearly £45 million.
During the same period, it disrupted over 1,500 websites and posts on social media accounts selling medicinal products illegally. Additionally, collaboration with one well-known online marketplace led to the successful identification and blocking of more than two million unregulated prescription medicines, over-the-counter medicines, and medical devices before they could be offered for sale to the public.
The MHRA is continually developing new and innovative ways to combat the illegal trade in medicines and to raise public awareness. These measures include:
- publication of a #Fakemeds campaign which explains how to access medicines through safe and legitimate online sources, with further information available at the following link:
https://fakemeds.campaign.gov.uk/;
- public guidance on how to safely access and use GLP-1 medications, available at the following link:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/glp-1-medicines-for-weight-loss-and-diabetes-what-you-need-to-know/glp-1-medicines-for-weight-loss-and-diabetes-what-you-need-to-know.
- implementation of a web-based reporting scheme allowing users to report suspicious online sellers to the MHRA;
- rollout of an online service which will allow users to check if a website has been deemed ‘Not Recommended’ by the MHRA; and
- extensive work with media outlets to raise awareness of the dangers of illegal medicines.
Asked by: Claire Young (Liberal Democrat - Thornbury and Yate)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of the potential merits of providing compensation to patients treated with rectopexy mesh for rectal prolapse as part of its work on redress following the recommendations of the Hughes Report, published on 7 February 2024.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
As set out in the Hughes Report, the Government is carefully considering the Patient Safety Commissioner’s (PSC’s) recommendations, including the proposed approaches to redress for those harmed by pelvic mesh. The Hughes Report did not cover patients treated with rectopexy mesh for rectal prolapse. This is because rectal prolapse does not fall within the original definition of Pelvic Organ Prolapse that the PSC and the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review adopted, namely a pelvic organ bulging into the vagina.
However, that is not to dismiss the very real concerns of these patients. We are considering whether rectopexy mesh should be included in the scope of the work on redress, as for example, NHS England has carried out a market engagement event to understand which of its currently commissioned mesh centres would be willing to provide mesh removal surgery for colorectal patients. A decision around which centres will be designated will be made following findings from the audit of existing mesh centres.
This is a complex, cross-Government policy area involving multiple organisations. This work requires coordinated input from several departments, and we will provide a further update in due course. I met with the PSC in December 2025, to discuss progress following the Hughes Report. I have subsequently written to Dr Hughes about the actions we are undertaking to ensure service-level interventions are embedded in the National Health Service specific to making a real-life impact on those affected by pelvic mesh and valproate.
Asked by: Baroness Morgan of Cotes (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that emergency medication for pupils with allergies is accessible, labelled and in-date, following the failings highlighted in the case of Benedict Blythe.
Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The statutory guidance ‘Supporting pupils at school with medical conditions’ is clear that all medicines should be stored safely. Children should know where their medicines are at all times and be able to access them immediately, including when outside of school premises. Where relevant, they should know who holds the key to the storage facility. Medicines and devices such as asthma inhalers, blood glucose testing meters and adrenaline pens should be always readily available.
Schools are required under Section 100 of the Children and Families Act 2014 to make arrangements to support pupils with medical conditions, including allergies. Schools should ensure they are aware of any pupils with medical conditions and have policies and processes in place to ensure these can be well managed. Governing bodies must ensure that the arrangements they put in place are sufficient to meet their statutory responsibilities and that policies, plans, procedures and systems are properly and effectively implemented.
Asked by: Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have considered changes to the use of individual funding requests for rare cancer treatments, particularly the requirement for exceptionality, for patients who have no alternative clinically appropriate treatment options.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government supports Scott Arthur’s Private Members Bill on rare cancers which will make it easier for clinical trials into rare cancers, including metastatic ocular melanoma patients, to take place in England by ensuring the patient population can be easily contacted by researchers. This will ensure that the National Health Service will remain at the forefront of medical innovation and is able to provide patients with the newest, most effective treatment options, and ultimately boost survival rates.
The Department remains committed to ensuring that rare cancer patients, including those with metastatic ocular melanoma, have timely access to treatment and tailored medical support.
Tebentafusp is a licensed treatment for uveal melanoma and has been recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and funded by NHS England since December 2024. Since funding commenced, over 100 patients have been registered to start treatment. At present, NHS England is not aware of any delays in access to Tebentafusp for eligible patients.
Alongside Tebentafusp, a policy proposition for melphalan chemosaturation was accepted onto the NHS England policy development work programme in March 2025, in line with the Methods for National Clinical Policies. Development of this policy is ongoing following receipt of the external evidence review. Progress updates are published through the NHS England Clinical Commissioning Work Programme, and NICE is concurrently updating its guidance. Until revised guidance is issued, the NHS continues to follow the recommendations in the current version.
The development of a Clinical Commissioning policy will determine both if the evidence is now sufficient to enable making the treatment routinely available and, if it is, whether to allocate service development funding to implement it across the NHS in England.
NHS England’s Individual Funding Request (IFR) Policy provides the framework through which requests outside routinely commissioned arrangements are considered. The IFR framework was last reviewed in 2022 and ensures fairness, consistency, and transparency in decision‑making across all applications relating to medicines, devices, or surgical interventions that fall within NHS England’s commissioning responsibilities.
Asked by: Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of delays in commissioning decisions on (1) outcomes, and (2) quality of life, for patients with rare cancers.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government supports Scott Arthur’s Private Members Bill on rare cancers which will make it easier for clinical trials into rare cancers, including metastatic ocular melanoma patients, to take place in England by ensuring the patient population can be easily contacted by researchers. This will ensure that the National Health Service will remain at the forefront of medical innovation and is able to provide patients with the newest, most effective treatment options, and ultimately boost survival rates.
The Department remains committed to ensuring that rare cancer patients, including those with metastatic ocular melanoma, have timely access to treatment and tailored medical support.
Tebentafusp is a licensed treatment for uveal melanoma and has been recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and funded by NHS England since December 2024. Since funding commenced, over 100 patients have been registered to start treatment. At present, NHS England is not aware of any delays in access to Tebentafusp for eligible patients.
Alongside Tebentafusp, a policy proposition for melphalan chemosaturation was accepted onto the NHS England policy development work programme in March 2025, in line with the Methods for National Clinical Policies. Development of this policy is ongoing following receipt of the external evidence review. Progress updates are published through the NHS England Clinical Commissioning Work Programme, and NICE is concurrently updating its guidance. Until revised guidance is issued, the NHS continues to follow the recommendations in the current version.
The development of a Clinical Commissioning policy will determine both if the evidence is now sufficient to enable making the treatment routinely available and, if it is, whether to allocate service development funding to implement it across the NHS in England.
NHS England’s Individual Funding Request (IFR) Policy provides the framework through which requests outside routinely commissioned arrangements are considered. The IFR framework was last reviewed in 2022 and ensures fairness, consistency, and transparency in decision‑making across all applications relating to medicines, devices, or surgical interventions that fall within NHS England’s commissioning responsibilities.
Asked by: Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what consideration they have given to introducing time-limited interim access pathways for rare cancer treatments where published clinical evidence and specialist expertise already exist but routine commissioning routes are not yet in place.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government supports Scott Arthur’s Private Members Bill on rare cancers which will make it easier for clinical trials into rare cancers, including metastatic ocular melanoma patients, to take place in England by ensuring the patient population can be easily contacted by researchers. This will ensure that the National Health Service will remain at the forefront of medical innovation and is able to provide patients with the newest, most effective treatment options, and ultimately boost survival rates.
The Department remains committed to ensuring that rare cancer patients, including those with metastatic ocular melanoma, have timely access to treatment and tailored medical support.
Tebentafusp is a licensed treatment for uveal melanoma and has been recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and funded by NHS England since December 2024. Since funding commenced, over 100 patients have been registered to start treatment. At present, NHS England is not aware of any delays in access to Tebentafusp for eligible patients.
Alongside Tebentafusp, a policy proposition for melphalan chemosaturation was accepted onto the NHS England policy development work programme in March 2025, in line with the Methods for National Clinical Policies. Development of this policy is ongoing following receipt of the external evidence review. Progress updates are published through the NHS England Clinical Commissioning Work Programme, and NICE is concurrently updating its guidance. Until revised guidance is issued, the NHS continues to follow the recommendations in the current version.
The development of a Clinical Commissioning policy will determine both if the evidence is now sufficient to enable making the treatment routinely available and, if it is, whether to allocate service development funding to implement it across the NHS in England.
NHS England’s Individual Funding Request (IFR) Policy provides the framework through which requests outside routinely commissioned arrangements are considered. The IFR framework was last reviewed in 2022 and ensures fairness, consistency, and transparency in decision‑making across all applications relating to medicines, devices, or surgical interventions that fall within NHS England’s commissioning responsibilities.
Asked by: Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what interim arrangements are in place to ensure timely access to clinically appropriate treatments for patients with rare cancers, including metastatic ocular melanoma, while longer term commissioning decisions are under consideration.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government supports Scott Arthur’s Private Members Bill on rare cancers which will make it easier for clinical trials into rare cancers, including metastatic ocular melanoma patients, to take place in England by ensuring the patient population can be easily contacted by researchers. This will ensure that the National Health Service will remain at the forefront of medical innovation and is able to provide patients with the newest, most effective treatment options, and ultimately boost survival rates.
The Department remains committed to ensuring that rare cancer patients, including those with metastatic ocular melanoma, have timely access to treatment and tailored medical support.
Tebentafusp is a licensed treatment for uveal melanoma and has been recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and funded by NHS England since December 2024. Since funding commenced, over 100 patients have been registered to start treatment. At present, NHS England is not aware of any delays in access to Tebentafusp for eligible patients.
Alongside Tebentafusp, a policy proposition for melphalan chemosaturation was accepted onto the NHS England policy development work programme in March 2025, in line with the Methods for National Clinical Policies. Development of this policy is ongoing following receipt of the external evidence review. Progress updates are published through the NHS England Clinical Commissioning Work Programme, and NICE is concurrently updating its guidance. Until revised guidance is issued, the NHS continues to follow the recommendations in the current version.
The development of a Clinical Commissioning policy will determine both if the evidence is now sufficient to enable making the treatment routinely available and, if it is, whether to allocate service development funding to implement it across the NHS in England.
NHS England’s Individual Funding Request (IFR) Policy provides the framework through which requests outside routinely commissioned arrangements are considered. The IFR framework was last reviewed in 2022 and ensures fairness, consistency, and transparency in decision‑making across all applications relating to medicines, devices, or surgical interventions that fall within NHS England’s commissioning responsibilities.
Asked by: Bob Blackman (Conservative - Harrow East)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether NHS England plans to commission specialist multidisciplinary services for people affected by sodium valproate exposure, including care coordination, to help reduce emergency admissions and diagnostic times.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review, First Do No Harm, identified significant shortcomings in National Health Service care pathways for people harmed by sodium valproate, including fragmented services, limited diagnostic expertise, delays in diagnosis, and inequitable access to multidisciplinary care. NHS England has acknowledged variation in the availability and adequacy of care pathways, the impact of delayed diagnosis and misdiagnosis on long-term outcomes, and the need for improved care coordination for those requiring lifelong support.
In response, NHS England has commissioned a Fetal Exposure to Medicines Services Pilot, being delivered by the Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and the Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust. The pilot provides multidisciplinary diagnostic assessment and is informing the development of improved care pathways, including consideration of specialist multidisciplinary services to support earlier diagnosis, better coordination of care, and reduced reliance on emergency care. Initial learning was shared with NHS England in September 2025, with final recommendations expected this summer to inform decisions on any national commissioning, subject to funding.
Finally, whilst integrated care boards (ICBs) are the responsible commissioners of the majority of health services, including services related to medically induced disabilities, no specific guidance has been issued to ICBs in relation to supporting individuals with complex, medicine-induced disabilities arising from sodium valproate.