Written questions by Nichols.

What assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of cervical cancer self-sampling on reaching under-screened populations; and what targets he has for the uptake of (a) in-clinic and (b) at-home self-sampling options.

Both the impact assessment and the equality impact assessment on the introduction of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling for the under-screened population in the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme have been published and is available at the following link:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cervical-screening-hpv-self-sampling-impact-assessmentsThe UK National Screening Committee’s recommendation for the use of HPV self-sampling was permissive, meaning the NHS can, but does not have to, implement it. They should use it where they believe it can have a useful impact on supporting uptake. There are therefore no national targets at this time.

If he will make it his policy that weight loss injections can only be prescribed following a face-to-face meeting with a GP who can determine that the patient (a) does not have too low a BMI and (b) signs of an eating disorder.

The Department is considering how the current prescribing system operates in relation to patient access to medicines through private, or non-National Health Service, routes. This includes online prescribing. A call for evidence was launched in August 2025 seeking feedback from individuals and organisations to ensure that the current systems remain fit for purpose.The General Pharmaceutical Council’s (GPhC) updated guidance states that prescribers are expected to verify the information given to them by the patient to ensure that any medicines prescribed are appropriate. This could be through a video consultation, using a patient’s clinical record, or contacting the patient’s general practitioner. This helps to safeguard vulnerable patients.If anyone has concerns about prescribing decisions or believes a medicine has been prescribed inappropriately, they can raise concerns with the prescriber’s professional regulator, for instance the General Medical Council or GPhC, with further information available at the following link:https://www.gmc-uk.org/concerns/supporting-you-with-your-concernIn addition to the duty of the prescriber, patients themselves must be honest when providing information to an online prescriber so that they receive advice and medicines which are appropriate for them, so that risks can be managed.

With reference to NHS England's plan entitled Cervical cancer elimination by 2040 – plan for England, published on 28 March 2025, if his Department will set out (a) who is responsible for each of the actions in that plan, (b) when those actions will be delivered by and (c) what the metrics are for success.

The Government is committed to improving vaccine uptake and access across all immunisation programmes by exploring new and innovative delivery models, including expanding routes such as community pharmacies, as set out in the NHS Vaccination Strategy and the 10-Year Health Plan for England. In June, the UK National Screening Committee, which advises ministers on all aspects of screening, recommended a human papilloma virus (HPV) self-sampling option to women and people with a cervix who never or rarely attend routine cervical screening appointments. From early in 2026, they will receive home testing kits if they have not responded to a cervical screening invitation for a period of time. This will help tackle deeply entrenched barriers that keep some away from life-saving screening. The World Health Organisation’s cervical cancer elimination targets will be used as the basis for ongoing monitoring, along with the regular assessment of cervical cancer rates. NHS England will be monitoring and evaluating the success of all the individual activities included within its elimination plan, as well as new initiatives as they are developed and implemented.

Whether his Department has made a recent assessment of the adequacy of controls on the (a) sale and (b) import of kava for food purposes in The Kava-kava in Food (England) Regulations 2002.

The Kava-kava in Food (England) Regulations 2002 prohibits any food consisting of or containing kava-kava from being imported or placed on the market. This regulation is in place to protect public health. Since the introduction of this legislation, any additional scientific evidence that has been provided to the Food Standards Agency (FSA) has not been sufficient to support any amendments to the controls in place. If additional data on the safety of kava-kava were to be submitted, appropriate evaluations, such as a risk assessment, will be considered by the FSA. The outputs of a risk assessment could then be used to provide advice to Ministers, to amend or repeal the legislation. New scientific evidence on the hepatotoxic risk of kava-kava would be reviewed by the FSA. Without additional evidence that indicates a safe level of human consumption for kava-kava, the FSA considers there is insufficient toxicological data available to initiate an assessment. While there is no specific provision in the regulation that sets out the procedure for revoking the controls, as safety concerns provide the basis for the ban, an assessment of newly available data on the safety of kava-kava for human consumption would be the first step. If the independent Committee on the Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment is satisfied that there is a safe level of human consumption, this would inform advice to Ministers to amend or repeal the legislation. Any future evaluation of the Kava-kava in Food (England) Regulations 2002, would need to be considered and carried out in tandem with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency as The Medicines for Human Use (Kava-kava) (Prohibition) Order 2002 is applicable.

If he will make an assessment of the potential impact of new research into the hepatotoxicity risk posed by kava on The Kava-kava in Food (England) Regulations 2002.

The Kava-kava in Food (England) Regulations 2002 prohibits any food consisting of or containing kava-kava from being imported or placed on the market. This regulation is in place to protect public health. Since the introduction of this legislation, any additional scientific evidence that has been provided to the Food Standards Agency (FSA) has not been sufficient to support any amendments to the controls in place. If additional data on the safety of kava-kava were to be submitted, appropriate evaluations, such as a risk assessment, will be considered by the FSA. The outputs of a risk assessment could then be used to provide advice to Ministers, to amend or repeal the legislation. New scientific evidence on the hepatotoxic risk of kava-kava would be reviewed by the FSA. Without additional evidence that indicates a safe level of human consumption for kava-kava, the FSA considers there is insufficient toxicological data available to initiate an assessment. While there is no specific provision in the regulation that sets out the procedure for revoking the controls, as safety concerns provide the basis for the ban, an assessment of newly available data on the safety of kava-kava for human consumption would be the first step. If the independent Committee on the Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment is satisfied that there is a safe level of human consumption, this would inform advice to Ministers to amend or repeal the legislation. Any future evaluation of the Kava-kava in Food (England) Regulations 2002, would need to be considered and carried out in tandem with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency as The Medicines for Human Use (Kava-kava) (Prohibition) Order 2002 is applicable.

With reference to the Kava-kava in Food (England) Regulations 2002, what provision exists for the revocation of this legislation should the evidence no longer support such controls.

The Kava-kava in Food (England) Regulations 2002 prohibits any food consisting of or containing kava-kava from being imported or placed on the market. This regulation is in place to protect public health. Since the introduction of this legislation, any additional scientific evidence that has been provided to the Food Standards Agency (FSA) has not been sufficient to support any amendments to the controls in place. If additional data on the safety of kava-kava were to be submitted, appropriate evaluations, such as a risk assessment, will be considered by the FSA. The outputs of a risk assessment could then be used to provide advice to Ministers, to amend or repeal the legislation. New scientific evidence on the hepatotoxic risk of kava-kava would be reviewed by the FSA. Without additional evidence that indicates a safe level of human consumption for kava-kava, the FSA considers there is insufficient toxicological data available to initiate an assessment. While there is no specific provision in the regulation that sets out the procedure for revoking the controls, as safety concerns provide the basis for the ban, an assessment of newly available data on the safety of kava-kava for human consumption would be the first step. If the independent Committee on the Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment is satisfied that there is a safe level of human consumption, this would inform advice to Ministers to amend or repeal the legislation. Any future evaluation of the Kava-kava in Food (England) Regulations 2002, would need to be considered and carried out in tandem with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency as The Medicines for Human Use (Kava-kava) (Prohibition) Order 2002 is applicable.

What steps he has taken to integrate synthetic opioid awareness into local authorities’ Drug Strategies since 5 July 2025; and how much of the 2025/26 targeted drug, alcohol treatment and recovery grant funding for local authorities in England, announced on 31 March 2025 he has allocated to public education on the (a) risks of synthetic opioids and (b) how to respond when witnessing an opioid overdose.

The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has issued planning guidance for local areas to help them respond to incidents caused by potent synthetic opioids. The guidance enables local partners to rapidly understand the scale of the synthetic opioid threat and assess the risk, communicate the threat, and take actions to mitigate it.The Combating Drugs Partnerships (CDP) are vital in leading the local response to synthetic opioids and developing preparedness plans to manage the risk in their area, utilising the local guidance issued by the Department. In addition to a tabletop exercise conducted with a range of relevant local partners, a sample of CDP preparedness plans have been analysed by the Government, and the Home Office has published a report which includes a series of recommendations to help local areas maintain their emergency preparation and response.Local authorities are responsible for commissioning drug and alcohol services according to local need and it is for local authorities to decide on the amount of funding to dedicate to public education on the risks of synthetic opioids and how to respond to an opioid overdose. DHSC has made clear that local authorities can allocate funding to support campaigns and events to improve understanding and reduce harm. In addition, in response to increasing use and the serious harms associated with synthetic opioids, the Department is planning a public health awareness campaign which will launch in the coming months. This campaign will raise awareness of new patterns of drug use and their associated risks.To ensure that vulnerable at-risk groups, including the homeless and those who are socially isolated, are aware of the dangers these drugs pose, regular drug alerts and communications are circulated by DHSC to commissioners and providers of drug treatment services, and there is ongoing engagement with local drug systems across England that are responsible for ensuring relevant professionals within their areas are adequately informed. It is their responsibility to circulate information with wider local stakeholders, such as the homelessness sector.DHSC also includes advice on how to respond when witnessing an opioid overdose in its naloxone guidance and on the Government’s drugs information website, Talk to FRANK.

What assessment he has made of the effectiveness of local Combating Drugs Partnerships in raising awareness of (a) synthetic opioids and (b) how to respond when witnessing an opioid overdose; and what plans he has to roll out best practice on that issue.

The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has issued planning guidance for local areas to help them respond to incidents caused by potent synthetic opioids. The guidance enables local partners to rapidly understand the scale of the synthetic opioid threat and assess the risk, communicate the threat, and take actions to mitigate it.The Combating Drugs Partnerships (CDP) are vital in leading the local response to synthetic opioids and developing preparedness plans to manage the risk in their area, utilising the local guidance issued by the Department. In addition to a tabletop exercise conducted with a range of relevant local partners, a sample of CDP preparedness plans have been analysed by the Government, and the Home Office has published a report which includes a series of recommendations to help local areas maintain their emergency preparation and response.Local authorities are responsible for commissioning drug and alcohol services according to local need and it is for local authorities to decide on the amount of funding to dedicate to public education on the risks of synthetic opioids and how to respond to an opioid overdose. DHSC has made clear that local authorities can allocate funding to support campaigns and events to improve understanding and reduce harm. In addition, in response to increasing use and the serious harms associated with synthetic opioids, the Department is planning a public health awareness campaign which will launch in the coming months. This campaign will raise awareness of new patterns of drug use and their associated risks.To ensure that vulnerable at-risk groups, including the homeless and those who are socially isolated, are aware of the dangers these drugs pose, regular drug alerts and communications are circulated by DHSC to commissioners and providers of drug treatment services, and there is ongoing engagement with local drug systems across England that are responsible for ensuring relevant professionals within their areas are adequately informed. It is their responsibility to circulate information with wider local stakeholders, such as the homelessness sector.DHSC also includes advice on how to respond when witnessing an opioid overdose in its naloxone guidance and on the Government’s drugs information website, Talk to FRANK.

What steps he has taken to raise awareness among (a) people sleeping rough, (b) socially isolated people and (c) other at-risk populations on the dangers of synthetic opioids since 2024.

The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has issued planning guidance for local areas to help them respond to incidents caused by potent synthetic opioids. The guidance enables local partners to rapidly understand the scale of the synthetic opioid threat and assess the risk, communicate the threat, and take actions to mitigate it.The Combating Drugs Partnerships (CDP) are vital in leading the local response to synthetic opioids and developing preparedness plans to manage the risk in their area, utilising the local guidance issued by the Department. In addition to a tabletop exercise conducted with a range of relevant local partners, a sample of CDP preparedness plans have been analysed by the Government, and the Home Office has published a report which includes a series of recommendations to help local areas maintain their emergency preparation and response.Local authorities are responsible for commissioning drug and alcohol services according to local need and it is for local authorities to decide on the amount of funding to dedicate to public education on the risks of synthetic opioids and how to respond to an opioid overdose. DHSC has made clear that local authorities can allocate funding to support campaigns and events to improve understanding and reduce harm. In addition, in response to increasing use and the serious harms associated with synthetic opioids, the Department is planning a public health awareness campaign which will launch in the coming months. This campaign will raise awareness of new patterns of drug use and their associated risks.To ensure that vulnerable at-risk groups, including the homeless and those who are socially isolated, are aware of the dangers these drugs pose, regular drug alerts and communications are circulated by DHSC to commissioners and providers of drug treatment services, and there is ongoing engagement with local drug systems across England that are responsible for ensuring relevant professionals within their areas are adequately informed. It is their responsibility to circulate information with wider local stakeholders, such as the homelessness sector.DHSC also includes advice on how to respond when witnessing an opioid overdose in its naloxone guidance and on the Government’s drugs information website, Talk to FRANK.

What information his Department holds on the potential impact of (a) diamorphine assisted therapy, (b) safe consumption rooms and (c) other drug harm reduction services on the level of ambulance call-outs.

Harm reduction measures are vital and can have an impact on preventing overdoses, reducing the spread of infections, and engaging people into drug treatment. However, most of these outcomes would not be seen in ambulance data. The Department does not collect information on the potential impact of diamorphine assisted therapy (DAT), safe consumption rooms and other harm reduction services on the level of ambulance call outs. Identifying the impact of interventions typically delivered to small groups within broader populations at risk of overdose on ambulance call outs would be challenging due to other factors influencing overall levels and it is unlikely to be possible to do this robustly within an English context.

How many applications have been made to the vaccine damage payment scheme since 2020, by vaccine type.

Data from the NHS Business Services Authority, the administrators of the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS), shows that 22,408 VDPS claims were received between 1 November 2021 and 4 July 2025. 1.1% of these have been successful, with a further 0.1% having been successful following an appeal, known as a mandatory reversal. Of the claims received:21,213 of these were for claims related to vaccination against COVID-19. 1.1% of these claims have been successful, with a further 0.1% having been successful after a mandatory reversal request;171 claims were received in relation to vaccination against flu in adults. 1.8% of these claims have been successful, and none of these claims were successful after a mandatory reversal; and1,024 claims were received in relation to vaccination against other diseases. 0.7% of these claims have been successful, and none of these claims were successful after a mandatory reversal.These figures are based on total applications received. Some of these applications will not yet have been assessed or were invalid.

What proportion of applications to the vaccine damage payment scheme since 2020 have been successful on appeal,by vaccine type.

Data from the NHS Business Services Authority, the administrators of the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS), shows that 22,408 VDPS claims were received between 1 November 2021 and 4 July 2025. 1.1% of these have been successful, with a further 0.1% having been successful following an appeal, known as a mandatory reversal. Of the claims received:21,213 of these were for claims related to vaccination against COVID-19. 1.1% of these claims have been successful, with a further 0.1% having been successful after a mandatory reversal request;171 claims were received in relation to vaccination against flu in adults. 1.8% of these claims have been successful, and none of these claims were successful after a mandatory reversal; and1,024 claims were received in relation to vaccination against other diseases. 0.7% of these claims have been successful, and none of these claims were successful after a mandatory reversal.These figures are based on total applications received. Some of these applications will not yet have been assessed or were invalid.

What proportion of applications to the vaccine damage payment scheme since 2020 have been successful, by vaccine type.

Data from the NHS Business Services Authority, the administrators of the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS), shows that 22,408 VDPS claims were received between 1 November 2021 and 4 July 2025. 1.1% of these have been successful, with a further 0.1% having been successful following an appeal, known as a mandatory reversal. Of the claims received:21,213 of these were for claims related to vaccination against COVID-19. 1.1% of these claims have been successful, with a further 0.1% having been successful after a mandatory reversal request;171 claims were received in relation to vaccination against flu in adults. 1.8% of these claims have been successful, and none of these claims were successful after a mandatory reversal; and1,024 claims were received in relation to vaccination against other diseases. 0.7% of these claims have been successful, and none of these claims were successful after a mandatory reversal.These figures are based on total applications received. Some of these applications will not yet have been assessed or were invalid.

What steps he plans to take to increase the uptake of measles vaccines.

The Department is working alongside its partners to increase vaccine uptake across all childhood vaccination programmes, including the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) programme.In light of a surge in measles cases in the North West, the UK Health Security Agency and the National Health Service are working with local partners to monitor the situation, provide advice, and support local communities to be aware of action they can take to protect themselves, including getting vaccinated.Building on the MMR coverage gains achieved in 2023/4, NHS England continues to deliver national and regional improvement plans that include activities to strengthen the routine vaccination offer and to address inequalities by supporting MMR catch up vaccination by school age vaccination services in schools and community settings. For example, summer ‘catch up’ immunisation clinics are being stood in some of the areas with the lowest MMR uptake including Liverpool, Knowsley, Sefton, and St Helens.National childhood vaccination communication campaigns are planned in August and September 2025 for children returning to school. This will be a re-launch of the 2024 childhood vaccination campaign aimed at increasing the awareness of childhood vaccinations and encouraging parents to book catch-up appointments.It is vitally important that everyone takes up the vaccinations they are entitled to, for themselves, their families, and wider society.  The MMR vaccine is highly effective, safe, and is the best way to prevent measles.

What information his Department holds on the impact of (a) diamorphine assisted therapy, (b) safe consumption rooms and (c) needle and syringe exchange services on rates of skin and soft tissue infection.

The Department does not collect information on the impact of diamorphine assisted therapy (DAT), safe consumption rooms and needle and exchange services on rates of soft skin tissue infections (SSTI). The Department is aware of the dangers of SSTI to people who inject drugs and in 2021 issued guidance for commissioners and providers of drugs services on being ‘wound aware’. This recommends that a range of local services can help prevent SSTIs and stop them getting worse through early identification and treatment.DAT is an option that remains open to local areas under the existing legal framework, where the relevant licences are obtained from the Home Office. There is good evidence that needle and syringe programmes alongside opioid substitution treatment are associated with reduced rates of HIV and hepatitis C infection in the target population. The review of the evidence is available at the following link:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/drug-misuse-treatment-in-england-evidence-review-of-outcomes

If he will make it his policy that publicly-funded medical trials (a) must be balanced by sex and (b) results must be sex-disaggregated.

Medical trials, wherever possible, should always be balanced by sex, however, certain clinical trials are designed to investigate conditions that are only specific to one sex, so enforcing a balance would not make sense on those occasions.The Department commissions research through the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR). As outlined in the Research Inclusion Strategy 2022-2027, the NIHR is committed to exploring an approach which enables and encourages the research community to integrate sex and gender into their research design, including in the disaggregation of research findings. The Research Inclusion Strategy 2022-2027 is available at the following link:https://www.nihr.ac.uk/about-us/who-we-are/research-inclusion/strategy-2022-27On 10 March, the NIHR launched its sex and gender policy, which is expected to come into force later in 2025, with further information available at the following link:https://www.nihr.ac.uk/integrating-sex-and-gender-health-and-care-researchImplementing such a policy will ensure that research accounts for sex and gender across every stage of the research cycle, thus facilitating both funding into topics that impact males and females, and a greater understanding of how they might be impacted differently by the same health condition.

How many and what proportion of applications to the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme were successful at (a) first application and (b) appeal since 2020.

Between 1 January 2020 and 6 June 2025, data from the NHS Business Services Authority, the administrators of the scheme, shows that 205 claims to the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme were successful at a first application. This equates to 1.5% of the claims that had received an initial outcome.In the same time period, 29 mandatory reversal requests were successful. This equates to 2.1% of the reversal outcomes that had been notified to claimants.

What steps he is taking to ensure the adequacy of access to dental services for children with SEND.

The Government recognises that certain groups of patients such as people with disabilities may find it difficult to access dental care. We are committed to ensuring National Health Service dental services are available to all who need them.Community dental services (CDS) are available to people whose additional needs may mean they are not able to be treated at high street dental practices. CDS provide specialised dental services to ensure that everyone can have access to the dental care they need. This may include treatments delivered in hospitals, specialist health centres and mobile clinics, as well as home visits or visits in nursing and care homes.Integrated care boards are responsible for identifying areas of local need and determining the priorities for investment, including the commissioning of community dental services.

If his Department will conduct a review of surgical menopause care.

The Government will prioritise women’s health as we reform the National Health Service, ensuring that all women experiencing the menopause can access the care that they need. We have taken urgent action to tackle gynaecology waiting lists through the Elective Reform Plan. In gynaecology, the plan supports innovative models offering patients care closer to home, and the piloting of gynaecology pathways in community diagnostic centres for patients with post-menopausal bleeding. Women’s health hubs also have a key role in shifting care out of hospitals and improving the care women receive. Menopause assessment and treatment is a core service that all hubs are expected to provide. As of December 2024, 39 out of 42 integrated care boards (ICBs) reported to NHS England that they had at least one operational women’s health hub. We continue to engage with and encourage ICBs to use the learning from the women’s health hubs pilots to improve local delivery of services to women. At present there are no plans to conduct a review of surgical menopause care.

When the Understanding Menopause guidance by Menopause Support UK will be published.

Menopause Support UK is an independent organisation, and the Department cannot advise on when this guidance will be published. NHS England routinely considers how they signpost to other sources of healthcare guidance. For example, the National Health Service’s website page on menopause signposts users to further sources of information.