Written questions by Andrew.

What the scope and timeframe is of any planned review into the overdiagnosis of mental health conditions and neurodivergence.

On 4 December 2025, we launched an independent review into the prevalence and support for mental health conditions, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and autism. The review will look to understand the similarities and differences between mental health conditions, ADHD, and autism. It will look at the prevalence, early intervention and treatment, and the current challenges facing clinical services. It will also examine the extent to which diagnosis, medicalisation, and treatment improve outcomes for individuals. This will include exploring the evidence around clinical practice and the risks and benefits of medicalisation.

Pursuant to the Answer of 2 December 2025 to Question 93697, whether he has made an estimate of the number of (a) preventable deaths and (b) cases of irreversible disability in children with Metachromatic Leukodystrophy over the last ten years; and how such outcomes are considered in UK National Screening Committee evaluations.

When evaluating the evidence relating to a health condition such as metachromatic leukodystrophy (MLD), the UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) considers important issues relating to the condition, the test, the treatment and the effectiveness of a screening programme. Considerations of the condition include reviewing the evidence of its frequency and/or severity, prevalence and incidence.My rt. Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, is advised by the UK NSC on the evidence on screening. The Committee, which is independent and made up of leading medical and screening experts, advises Ministers in all four nations of the United Kingdom.  Where the Committee is confident that screening provides more good than harm, they recommend a screening programme.

Whether his Department is undertaking a review into the prevalence and overdiagnosis of mental health conditions and neurodivergence.

On 4 December 2025, we launched an independent review into the prevalence and support for mental health conditions, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and autism. The review will look to understand the similarities and differences between mental health conditions, ADHD, and autism. It will look at the prevalence, early intervention and treatment, and the current challenges facing clinical services. It will also examine the extent to which diagnosis, medicalisation, and treatment improve outcomes for individuals. This will include exploring the evidence around clinical practice and the risks and benefits of medicalisation.

Pursuant to the Answer of 2 December 2025 to Question 93697, whether he has made an estimate of the differences in the number of conditions screened for in newborns between the UK and other countries such as Norway, Australia, Italy, Poland, and the Netherlands; and how those differences relate to the internationally recognised criteria used by the UK National Screening Committee.

Screening programmes in the United Kingdom have a more rigorous approach towards evaluating the benefits and harms of screening compared to many other countries such as the United States of America and Italy.The independent UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC), which is made up of leading medical and screening experts, advises Ministers in all four nations of the UK on the evidence on screening. Where the Committee is confident that screening provides more good than harm, they recommend a screening programme.Some countries often cited as screening more conditions than the UK are not always running national programmes. Some countries or regions screen for a condition when it is only at the pilot or research stage. Some ‘screening programmes’ just test for a condition rather than being end-to-end quality-assured programmes that include diagnosis, treatment and care. And screening in some countries is delivered regionally, or even just by individual hospitals, rather than nationally. They are therefore not directly comparable to the national screening programmes offered in the UK.

Pursuant to the Answer of 2 December 2025 to Question 93697, if he will meet with representatives of ArchAngel MLD Trust, the MPS Society, MLD Support UK, the LSD Collaborative, and Alex – The Leukodystrophy Charity before responding to the UK National Screening Committee’s forthcoming recommendation on Metachromatic Leukodystrophy.

My rt. Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, will carefully consider a UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) recommendation on metachromatic leukodystrophy when it is presented to him, before making a decision. The Secretary of State will ask officials to meet with representatives of ArchAngel MLD Trust, the MPS Society, MLD Support UK, the LSD Collaborative, and Alex – The Leukodystrophy Charity.

What assessment he has made of the potential impact on child development outcomes of not matching Start for Life funding with the expansion of Best Start Family Hubs.

We are committed to delivering the 10-Year Health Plan ambition to match Healthy Babies, formerly Start for Life, to Best Start Family Hubs over the next decade.There is strong evidence that the 1,001 days from pregnancy to the age of two years old set the foundations for our cognitive, emotional, and physical development. Supporting babies and their families in this period provides an opportunity to improve health and education outcomes and reduce inequalities, including on Early Years Foundation Stage domains.We have already started to deliver the shift from treatment to prevention by providing funding to 75 areas to deliver universal, prevention-focussed Healthy Babies services. From April, the Government is rolling out Best Start Family Hubs to all local authorities, backed by over £500 million to reach up to half a million more children and families. This funding will help embed hubs within a wider support system, including integrated child health services, and will enable proactive identification and support for health issues and early developmental delays.

Whether it is his intention to expand Start for Life funding to the 78 local authorities currently without provision.

The 10-Year Health Plan sets out an ambitious agenda on how we will improve the nation’s health by creating a new model of care that is fit for the future.We recognise that local authorities are ambitious, seeking to deliver universal support to families and prevent escalating need. We are committed to delivering the 10-Year Health Plan’s ambition to match Healthy Babies, formerly Start for Life, to Best Start Family Hubs over the next decade.From April, this Government is rolling out Best Start Family Hubs to all local authorities, backed by over £500 million to reach up to half a million more children and families. This funding will help embed Hubs within a wider support system, including integrated child health services, enable proactive identification and support for health issues and early developmental delays.

What discussions she has had with the banking sector and the Payment Systems Regulator on improving the ability of banks to identify and flag potentially suspicious payments linked to unauthorised investment schemes such as High Street Group; and whether she will make an assessment of the case for enhanced tracing and recovery arrangements in such cases.

The Government recognises the impact of the collapse of the High Street Group (HSG) on those who invested with it. The administrators of HSG estimate that the value of investments affected is about £123 million. As the regulator of financial services in the UK, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) stresses the importance of consumers getting the support they need and encourages consumers to only deal with FCA-authorised firms when making financial investments. HSG was not authorised by the FCA, and the issuing and distributing of its products was not a regulated activity. This means that investments made in HSG are not protected by the Financial Ombudsman Service or the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS), unless the investment was via a regulated financial adviser or SIPP operator. As an important point of principle, the Government does not step in to pay compensation in respect of firms that fall outside of the FSCS. Doing so would create the wrong set of incentives for individuals and place an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer. As HSG was not authorised by the FCA, and the issuing and distributing of its products is not a regulated activity, the FCA did not have supervisory oversight. The FCA does not have power to investigate a firm that is unauthorised and not carrying out any regulated activities and so the FCA's ability to intervene was limited. However, the promotion and marketing of such loan notes requires approval from FCA-authorised firms, unless a relevant exemption applies. The FCA has taken action against unauthorised promoters of HSG's investment scheme where financial promotions were made in breach of their rules. This action has included unannounced visits, warning letters and the removal of non-compliant financial promotions from the internet. Action is being taken to reduce the risk of future investment schemes operating in this manner. The FCA has banned the mass marketing of speculative mini-bonds, which means firms with similar business models to HSG can no longer market their mini-bonds to ordinary retail investors. Furthermore, the forthcoming public offers and admission to trading regime will bring the issuance of non-transferable debt securities, such as minibonds, within the scope of regulation. That new regime will come into force in January 2026. With respect to any discussions between the Government, regulators and the banking sector, Treasury Ministers have meetings with a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and delivery. Details of ministerial meetings with external organisations on departmental business are published on a quarterly basis and are available at the link below. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/hmt-ministers-meetings-hospitality-gifts-and-overseas-travel

What assessment she has made of the adequacy of the redress and support mechanisms available to retail investors who have suffered losses in unauthorised mini-bond schemes that fall outside the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, including High Street Group.

The Government recognises the impact of the collapse of the High Street Group (HSG) on those who invested with it. The administrators of HSG estimate that the value of investments affected is about £123 million. As the regulator of financial services in the UK, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) stresses the importance of consumers getting the support they need and encourages consumers to only deal with FCA-authorised firms when making financial investments. HSG was not authorised by the FCA, and the issuing and distributing of its products was not a regulated activity. This means that investments made in HSG are not protected by the Financial Ombudsman Service or the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS), unless the investment was via a regulated financial adviser or SIPP operator. As an important point of principle, the Government does not step in to pay compensation in respect of firms that fall outside of the FSCS. Doing so would create the wrong set of incentives for individuals and place an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer. As HSG was not authorised by the FCA, and the issuing and distributing of its products is not a regulated activity, the FCA did not have supervisory oversight. The FCA does not have power to investigate a firm that is unauthorised and not carrying out any regulated activities and so the FCA's ability to intervene was limited. However, the promotion and marketing of such loan notes requires approval from FCA-authorised firms, unless a relevant exemption applies. The FCA has taken action against unauthorised promoters of HSG's investment scheme where financial promotions were made in breach of their rules. This action has included unannounced visits, warning letters and the removal of non-compliant financial promotions from the internet. Action is being taken to reduce the risk of future investment schemes operating in this manner. The FCA has banned the mass marketing of speculative mini-bonds, which means firms with similar business models to HSG can no longer market their mini-bonds to ordinary retail investors. Furthermore, the forthcoming public offers and admission to trading regime will bring the issuance of non-transferable debt securities, such as minibonds, within the scope of regulation. That new regime will come into force in January 2026. With respect to any discussions between the Government, regulators and the banking sector, Treasury Ministers have meetings with a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and delivery. Details of ministerial meetings with external organisations on departmental business are published on a quarterly basis and are available at the link below. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/hmt-ministers-meetings-hospitality-gifts-and-overseas-travel

Whether her Department has made an estimate of (a) the number of retail investors and (b) the total value of investments affected by the collapse of High Street Group mini-bonds and related schemes; and what assessment she has made of the implications of that case for the regulation of unauthorised investment products.

The Government recognises the impact of the collapse of the High Street Group (HSG) on those who invested with it. The administrators of HSG estimate that the value of investments affected is about £123 million. As the regulator of financial services in the UK, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) stresses the importance of consumers getting the support they need and encourages consumers to only deal with FCA-authorised firms when making financial investments. HSG was not authorised by the FCA, and the issuing and distributing of its products was not a regulated activity. This means that investments made in HSG are not protected by the Financial Ombudsman Service or the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS), unless the investment was via a regulated financial adviser or SIPP operator. As an important point of principle, the Government does not step in to pay compensation in respect of firms that fall outside of the FSCS. Doing so would create the wrong set of incentives for individuals and place an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer. As HSG was not authorised by the FCA, and the issuing and distributing of its products is not a regulated activity, the FCA did not have supervisory oversight. The FCA does not have power to investigate a firm that is unauthorised and not carrying out any regulated activities and so the FCA's ability to intervene was limited. However, the promotion and marketing of such loan notes requires approval from FCA-authorised firms, unless a relevant exemption applies. The FCA has taken action against unauthorised promoters of HSG's investment scheme where financial promotions were made in breach of their rules. This action has included unannounced visits, warning letters and the removal of non-compliant financial promotions from the internet. Action is being taken to reduce the risk of future investment schemes operating in this manner. The FCA has banned the mass marketing of speculative mini-bonds, which means firms with similar business models to HSG can no longer market their mini-bonds to ordinary retail investors. Furthermore, the forthcoming public offers and admission to trading regime will bring the issuance of non-transferable debt securities, such as minibonds, within the scope of regulation. That new regime will come into force in January 2026. With respect to any discussions between the Government, regulators and the banking sector, Treasury Ministers have meetings with a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and delivery. Details of ministerial meetings with external organisations on departmental business are published on a quarterly basis and are available at the link below. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/hmt-ministers-meetings-hospitality-gifts-and-overseas-travel

Whether she will ask the Financial Conduct Authority and other relevant bodies to review their handling of intelligence and complaints relating to High Street Group and similar unauthorised mini-bond schemes; and to publish any lessons learned on consumer protection.

The Government recognises the impact of the collapse of the High Street Group (HSG) on those who invested with it. The administrators of HSG estimate that the value of investments affected is about £123 million. As the regulator of financial services in the UK, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) stresses the importance of consumers getting the support they need and encourages consumers to only deal with FCA-authorised firms when making financial investments. HSG was not authorised by the FCA, and the issuing and distributing of its products was not a regulated activity. This means that investments made in HSG are not protected by the Financial Ombudsman Service or the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS), unless the investment was via a regulated financial adviser or SIPP operator. As an important point of principle, the Government does not step in to pay compensation in respect of firms that fall outside of the FSCS. Doing so would create the wrong set of incentives for individuals and place an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer. As HSG was not authorised by the FCA, and the issuing and distributing of its products is not a regulated activity, the FCA did not have supervisory oversight. The FCA does not have power to investigate a firm that is unauthorised and not carrying out any regulated activities and so the FCA's ability to intervene was limited. However, the promotion and marketing of such loan notes requires approval from FCA-authorised firms, unless a relevant exemption applies. The FCA has taken action against unauthorised promoters of HSG's investment scheme where financial promotions were made in breach of their rules. This action has included unannounced visits, warning letters and the removal of non-compliant financial promotions from the internet. Action is being taken to reduce the risk of future investment schemes operating in this manner. The FCA has banned the mass marketing of speculative mini-bonds, which means firms with similar business models to HSG can no longer market their mini-bonds to ordinary retail investors. Furthermore, the forthcoming public offers and admission to trading regime will bring the issuance of non-transferable debt securities, such as minibonds, within the scope of regulation. That new regime will come into force in January 2026. With respect to any discussions between the Government, regulators and the banking sector, Treasury Ministers have meetings with a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and delivery. Details of ministerial meetings with external organisations on departmental business are published on a quarterly basis and are available at the link below. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/hmt-ministers-meetings-hospitality-gifts-and-overseas-travel

What assessment she has made of how the proposed new regulatory regime for non-transferable securities and mini-bonds would have applied to the High Street Group scheme had it been in force at the time; and what conclusions she has drawn from that assessment for the position of people impacted by that scheme.

The Government recognises the impact of the collapse of the High Street Group (HSG) on those who invested with it. The administrators of HSG estimate that the value of investments affected is about £123 million. As the regulator of financial services in the UK, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) stresses the importance of consumers getting the support they need and encourages consumers to only deal with FCA-authorised firms when making financial investments. HSG was not authorised by the FCA, and the issuing and distributing of its products was not a regulated activity. This means that investments made in HSG are not protected by the Financial Ombudsman Service or the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS), unless the investment was via a regulated financial adviser or SIPP operator. As an important point of principle, the Government does not step in to pay compensation in respect of firms that fall outside of the FSCS. Doing so would create the wrong set of incentives for individuals and place an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer. As HSG was not authorised by the FCA, and the issuing and distributing of its products is not a regulated activity, the FCA did not have supervisory oversight. The FCA does not have power to investigate a firm that is unauthorised and not carrying out any regulated activities and so the FCA's ability to intervene was limited. However, the promotion and marketing of such loan notes requires approval from FCA-authorised firms, unless a relevant exemption applies. The FCA has taken action against unauthorised promoters of HSG's investment scheme where financial promotions were made in breach of their rules. This action has included unannounced visits, warning letters and the removal of non-compliant financial promotions from the internet. Action is being taken to reduce the risk of future investment schemes operating in this manner. The FCA has banned the mass marketing of speculative mini-bonds, which means firms with similar business models to HSG can no longer market their mini-bonds to ordinary retail investors. Furthermore, the forthcoming public offers and admission to trading regime will bring the issuance of non-transferable debt securities, such as minibonds, within the scope of regulation. That new regime will come into force in January 2026. With respect to any discussions between the Government, regulators and the banking sector, Treasury Ministers have meetings with a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and delivery. Details of ministerial meetings with external organisations on departmental business are published on a quarterly basis and are available at the link below. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/hmt-ministers-meetings-hospitality-gifts-and-overseas-travel

What steps his Department is taking to address regional and rural-urban disparities in ambulance response times, with reference to the performance of East Midlands Ambulance Service.

We acknowledge that ambulance performance has not consistently met expectations in recent years, and we are taking serious steps to improve performance across the country, including rural and semi-urban areas. That is why we published our Urgent and Emergency Care Plan for 2025/26, backed by almost £450 million of capital investment, which commits to reducing ambulance response times for Category 2 incidents to 30 minutes on average this year.The NHS Constitutional standards for ambulance response time metrics are measured with an average figure as well as a 90th centile standard which means that trusts are held to account for the response times they provide to all patients, improving the performance management of the ‘long tail’ of delayed ambulance responses that we know can particularly affect rural and semi-urban areas. In the East Midlands, the latest NHS England figures show a 22-minute improvement in the Category 2 90th centile response time compared with last year.We have already seen improvements in ambulance response times for the East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust (EMAS). The latest National Health Service performance figures for EMAS show that Category 2 incidents were responded to in 46 minutes and 55 seconds on average, over 11 minutes faster than the same period last year.

What the average ambulance response time for Category 2 calls was in rural parts of the East Midlands in each of the last 12 months; and how this compares with response times in urban areas in the region.

We acknowledge that ambulance performance has not consistently met expectations in recent years, and we are taking serious steps to improve performance across the country, including rural and semi-urban areas. That is why we published our Urgent and Emergency Care Plan for 2025/26, backed by almost £450 million of capital investment, which commits to reducing ambulance response times for Category 2 incidents to 30 minutes on average this year.The NHS Constitutional standards for ambulance response time metrics are measured with an average figure as well as a 90th centile standard which means that trusts are held to account for the response times they provide to all patients, improving the performance management of the ‘long tail’ of delayed ambulance responses that we know can particularly affect rural and semi-urban areas. In the East Midlands, the latest NHS England figures show a 22-minute improvement in the Category 2 90th centile response time compared with last year.We have already seen improvements in ambulance response times for the East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust (EMAS). The latest National Health Service performance figures for EMAS show that Category 2 incidents were responded to in 46 minutes and 55 seconds on average, over 11 minutes faster than the same period last year.

What assessment his Department has made of ambulance response times in rural areas of the East Midlands; and what steps are being taken to improve response times in those communities.

We acknowledge that ambulance performance has not consistently met expectations in recent years, and we are taking serious steps to improve performance across the country, including rural and semi-urban areas. That is why we published our Urgent and Emergency Care Plan for 2025/26, backed by almost £450 million of capital investment, which commits to reducing ambulance response times for Category 2 incidents to 30 minutes on average this year.The NHS Constitutional standards for ambulance response time metrics are measured with an average figure as well as a 90th centile standard which means that trusts are held to account for the response times they provide to all patients, improving the performance management of the ‘long tail’ of delayed ambulance responses that we know can particularly affect rural and semi-urban areas. In the East Midlands, the latest NHS England figures show a 22-minute improvement in the Category 2 90th centile response time compared with last year.We have already seen improvements in ambulance response times for the East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust (EMAS). The latest National Health Service performance figures for EMAS show that Category 2 incidents were responded to in 46 minutes and 55 seconds on average, over 11 minutes faster than the same period last year.

Whether the Government plans to publish a detailed roadmap for improving national missile defence capabilities, including timelines and funding commitments.

The Strategic Defence Review announced up to £1 billion of investment in Integrated Air and Missile Defence. This announcement responds to the threat the UK faces and will shape our future Integrated Air and Missile Defence capability. Work to deliver the Strategic Defence Review recommendations, including on homeland Integrated Air and Missile Defence, will be prioritised appropriately against the assessed threat picture as part of the future Integrated Force and set out in the Defence Investment Plan to be published this year.

What recent assessment his Department has made of the UK’s vulnerability to long-range missile threats, including ballistic and cruise missile systems; and what steps he is taking to strengthen integrated air and missile defence as part of the Strategic Defence Review.

The Strategic Defence Review announced up to £1 billion of investment in Integrated Air and Missile Defence. This announcement responds to the threat the UK faces and will shape our future Integrated Air and Missile Defence capability. Work to deliver the Strategic Defence Review recommendations, including on homeland Integrated Air and Missile Defence, will be prioritised appropriately against the assessed threat picture as part of the future Integrated Force and set out in the Defence Investment Plan to be published this year.

If he will publish the terms of reference for the Department’s review into the prevalence and potential over-diagnosis of mental health conditions and neurodivergence.

My Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care announced on 4 December 2025, via a Written Ministerial Statement, the launch of an independent review into the prevalence and support for mental health conditions, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and autism.The Government is deeply concerned that many adults, young people, and children with mental health conditions, ADHD, and autism have been let down by services and are not receiving timely or appropriate support and treatment. Therefore, we are launching this review to understand the rise in the prevalence and demand for services, so people receive the right support at the right time and in the right place.The review will look to understand, with regard to mental health conditions, ADHD and autism, the similarities and differences regarding prevalence, early intervention and treatment, the current challenges facing clinical services, and the extent to which diagnosis, medicalisation, and treatment improve outcomes for individuals.Professor Peter Fonagy will chair the review with the support of two vice chairs, Professor Sir Simon Wessely and Professor Gillian Baird. The review will appoint an advisory working group of leading academics, clinicians, epidemiological experts, charities, and people with lived experience to directly shape the recommendations and scrutinise the evidence. The Terms of Reference have been published on GOV.UK website and are available at the following link:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/independent-review-into-mental-health-conditions-adhd-and-autism-terms-of-reference

Whether his Department is undertaking a review into the prevalence of the over-diagnosis of mental health conditions and neurodivergence.

My Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care announced on 4 December 2025, via a Written Ministerial Statement, the launch of an independent review into the prevalence and support for mental health conditions, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and autism.The Government is deeply concerned that many adults, young people, and children with mental health conditions, ADHD, and autism have been let down by services and are not receiving timely or appropriate support and treatment. Therefore, we are launching this review to understand the rise in the prevalence and demand for services, so people receive the right support at the right time and in the right place.The review will look to understand, with regard to mental health conditions, ADHD and autism, the similarities and differences regarding prevalence, early intervention and treatment, the current challenges facing clinical services, and the extent to which diagnosis, medicalisation, and treatment improve outcomes for individuals.Professor Peter Fonagy will chair the review with the support of two vice chairs, Professor Sir Simon Wessely and Professor Gillian Baird. The review will appoint an advisory working group of leading academics, clinicians, epidemiological experts, charities, and people with lived experience to directly shape the recommendations and scrutinise the evidence. The Terms of Reference have been published on GOV.UK website and are available at the following link:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/independent-review-into-mental-health-conditions-adhd-and-autism-terms-of-reference

What recent discussions he has had with representatives of the mental health and neurodivergence sectors on over-diagnosis.

My Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care announced on 4 December 2025, via a Written Ministerial Statement, the launch of an independent review into the prevalence and support for mental health conditions, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and autism.The Government is deeply concerned that many adults, young people, and children with mental health conditions, ADHD, and autism have been let down by services and are not receiving timely or appropriate support and treatment. Therefore, we are launching this review to understand the rise in the prevalence and demand for services, so people receive the right support at the right time and in the right place.The review will look to understand, with regard to mental health conditions, ADHD and autism, the similarities and differences regarding prevalence, early intervention and treatment, the current challenges facing clinical services, and the extent to which diagnosis, medicalisation, and treatment improve outcomes for individuals.Professor Peter Fonagy will chair the review with the support of two vice chairs, Professor Sir Simon Wessely and Professor Gillian Baird. The review will appoint an advisory working group of leading academics, clinicians, epidemiological experts, charities, and people with lived experience to directly shape the recommendations and scrutinise the evidence. The Terms of Reference have been published on GOV.UK website and are available at the following link:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/independent-review-into-mental-health-conditions-adhd-and-autism-terms-of-reference