The National Consultant Information Programme (NCIP) is publicly accessible to patients on the Getting It Right First Time website.

The NCIP portal is a free data platform containing consultant and provider-level activity and outcomes data for over 500 procedures in 13 surgical specialties. It covers National Health Service practices, NHS funded work in the independent sector, and privately funded work carried out in the NHS. Over time, the ambition is to add independent sector data, to provide a single repository of whole practice. Currently, patients are not able to access this data.

NCIP allows consultants in 13 surgical specialties to access their individual outcomes data, for personal learning, clinical governance, and appraisals. NCIP does not record practising privileges in the independent sector.

NCIP is a critical part of the response to the Paterson Inquiry, which recommended that there should be a single repository of the whole practice of consultants across England. By sharing high-quality outcome data, consultants, their appraisers, and responsible officers can compare outcomes for their practice or use peer review to improve their performance in a way that is measurable and objective, leading to better safety and efficiency across the NHS.

The Department recognises the importance of ensuring that patients have clear information about their care in the National Health Service, whether delivered by NHS providers or independent sector providers. We have recently published a set of patient experience minimum standards setting out our expectations of providers of NHS funded elective care while patients are on the waiting list.

We will provide an update on this commitment in due course.

The General Medical Council (GMC) is independent of the Government, directly accountable to Parliament, and is responsible for operational matters concerning the discharge of its statutory duties. The United Kingdom’s model of healthcare professional regulation is founded on the principle of regulators operating independently from the Government.

The Department does not hold national datasets on what audits of consent practice have been undertaken in the National Health Service or in the independent sector, since the publication of the Paterson Inquiry Report published on 4 February 2020.

NHS England has integrated decision support tools into elective pathways of care. These tools support two stage shared decision making, which introduces a period of reflection for patients when deciding on treatment options and giving consent. This allows patients to take the time to fully understand the benefits and risks of treatment, talk with friends and family, and decide whether it is the most suitable option for them.

The Medical Practitioners Assurance Framework (MPAF) was developed by the Independent Healthcare Providers Network in response to reviews, including the Paterson Inquiry. The MPAF is designed to provide a basis from which all independent providers can work, giving confidence to patients and regulators, such as the Care Quality Commission, on what good looks like. The MPAF advises that policies need to provide for patients to be given specific time to reflect and make decisions.

In October 2021, the Professional Record Standards Body (PRSB) updated its guidance on standard outpatient letters to make it clear that it is best practice for most outpatient letters to be written directly to the patient. The NHS Standard Contract states that outpatient letters should be consistent with PRSB’s standards. All National Health Service and independent sector providers are regulated by the Care Quality Commission, and assessments include how services ensure that patients understand and are involved in decisions regarding their care. As per the Competition and Markets Authority’s Order, private healthcare providers must send letters to patients prior to consultations or further tests and treatments setting out the costs, reasons, and other relevant information regarding the procedure.

Our records indicate that the Paterson Inquiry Response Programme Board last met virtually in 2023. Membership included representatives from the following bodies; the Department; NHS England; the Care Quality Commission; the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; the Competition and Markets Authority; the General Medical Council; the Independent Healthcare Providers Network; the Independent Sector Complaints Adjudication Service; the National Consultant Information Programme; NHS Digital; NHS Providers; NHS Resolution; the Professional Standards Authority; the Royal College of Surgeons; Spire; and the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust. There are no current plans to publish the boards minutes.

As referenced in the answers to HL960 and HL1431, the Government accepted 13 of the 15 recommendations set out in the 2020 Paterson Inquiry Report. Of these, nine recommendations have been implemented or partially implemented, and four recommendations are in progress. While there is no timeline for full implementation, we are working with NHS England to implement the outstanding recommendations as quickly as possible.

In October 2021, the Professional Record Standards Body (PRSB) updated its guidance on standard outpatient letters to make it clear that it is best practice for most outpatient letters to be written directly to the patient. The NHS Standard Contract states that outpatient letters should be consistent with PRSB’s standards. All National Health Service and independent sector providers are regulated by the Care Quality Commission, and assessments include how services ensure that patients understand and are involved in decisions regarding their care. As per the Competition and Markets Authority’s Order, private healthcare providers must send letters to patients prior to consultations or further tests and treatments setting out the costs, reasons, and other relevant information regarding the procedure.

Our records indicate that the Paterson Inquiry Response Programme Board last met virtually in 2023. Membership included representatives from the following bodies; the Department; NHS England; the Care Quality Commission; the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; the Competition and Markets Authority; the General Medical Council; the Independent Healthcare Providers Network; the Independent Sector Complaints Adjudication Service; the National Consultant Information Programme; NHS Digital; NHS Providers; NHS Resolution; the Professional Standards Authority; the Royal College of Surgeons; Spire; and the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust. There are no current plans to publish the boards minutes.

As referenced in the answers to HL960 and HL1431, the Government accepted 13 of the 15 recommendations set out in the 2020 Paterson Inquiry Report. Of these, nine recommendations have been implemented or partially implemented, and four recommendations are in progress. While there is no timeline for full implementation, we are working with NHS England to implement the outstanding recommendations as quickly as possible.

In October 2021, the Professional Record Standards Body (PRSB) updated its guidance on standard outpatient letters to make it clear that it is best practice for most outpatient letters to be written directly to the patient. The NHS Standard Contract states that outpatient letters should be consistent with PRSB’s standards. All National Health Service and independent sector providers are regulated by the Care Quality Commission, and assessments include how services ensure that patients understand and are involved in decisions regarding their care. As per the Competition and Markets Authority’s Order, private healthcare providers must send letters to patients prior to consultations or further tests and treatments setting out the costs, reasons, and other relevant information regarding the procedure.

Our records indicate that the Paterson Inquiry Response Programme Board last met virtually in 2023. Membership included representatives from the following bodies; the Department; NHS England; the Care Quality Commission; the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; the Competition and Markets Authority; the General Medical Council; the Independent Healthcare Providers Network; the Independent Sector Complaints Adjudication Service; the National Consultant Information Programme; NHS Digital; NHS Providers; NHS Resolution; the Professional Standards Authority; the Royal College of Surgeons; Spire; and the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust. There are no current plans to publish the boards minutes.

As referenced in the answers to HL960 and HL1431, the Government accepted 13 of the 15 recommendations set out in the 2020 Paterson Inquiry Report. Of these, nine recommendations have been implemented or partially implemented, and four recommendations are in progress. While there is no timeline for full implementation, we are working with NHS England to implement the outstanding recommendations as quickly as possible.

As referenced in the answer to HL960, the Government accepted 13 of the 15 recommendations set out in the 2020 Paterson Inquiry Report. Of these, nine recommendations have been implemented or partially implemented, and four recommendations are in progress. While there is no timeline for full implementation, we are working with NHS England to implement the outstanding recommendations as quickly as possible.

There is currently no cross-departmental mechanism between the Ministry of Justice and the Department of Health and Social Care to monitor the implementation of the Paterson Inquiry’s recommendations.

We recognise the need to strengthen oversight of recommendations. The 10-Year Health Plan committed to giving specific responsibility for reviewing, analysing, and taking forward recommendations to the National Quality Board (NQB). Work is underway to develop a central recommendations hub to support the NQB in operating a clearing house function to coordinate and prioritise recommendations, track progress of prioritised recommendations, and strengthen accountability. Plans are currently being developed for testing with rollout starting in 2027.

In December 2022, the Government published its 12-month implementation update which was available to all affected patients and stakeholders. The Government is keeping the need for further formal updates on implementation progress under review.

As referenced in the answer to HL960, the Government accepted 13 of the 15 recommendations set out in the 2020 Paterson Inquiry Report. Of these, nine recommendations have been implemented or partially implemented, and four recommendations are in progress. While there is no timeline for full implementation, we are working with NHS England to implement the outstanding recommendations as quickly as possible.

There is currently no cross-departmental mechanism between the Ministry of Justice and the Department of Health and Social Care to monitor the implementation of the Paterson Inquiry’s recommendations.

We recognise the need to strengthen oversight of recommendations. The 10-Year Health Plan committed to giving specific responsibility for reviewing, analysing, and taking forward recommendations to the National Quality Board (NQB). Work is underway to develop a central recommendations hub to support the NQB in operating a clearing house function to coordinate and prioritise recommendations, track progress of prioritised recommendations, and strengthen accountability. Plans are currently being developed for testing with rollout starting in 2027.

In December 2022, the Government published its 12-month implementation update which was available to all affected patients and stakeholders. The Government is keeping the need for further formal updates on implementation progress under review.

The Government has assessed progress against 13 of the 15 recommendations it accepted of the 2020 Paterson Inquiry through its published response in December 2021 and a 12‑month implementation update in December 2022.

These assessments found that nine of the recommendations have been implemented or partially implemented and four recommendations are in progress, with action taken across both the National Health Service and the independent sector to strengthen clinical governance, oversight of consultants, and patient safety. Implementation has been delivered collaboratively with system partners, including regulators and providers in both sectors, to support greater consistency.

The Government is keeping the need for further formal updates under review.

The Medical Practitioners Assurance Framework is designed to provide a basis from which all independent providers can work, giving confidence to patients and regulators, such as the Care Quality Commission (CQC), on ‘what good looks like’. This framework takes a principles-based approach to outlining provider responsibilities and has been adopted by the CQC into its single assessment framework and sector guidance.

With respect to doctors, the Medical Profession (Responsible Officers) Regulations 2010 sets out a duty for organisations designated under the regulations, known as designated bodies, to appoint a responsible officer. One of the duties of a responsible officer is to make recommendations to the General Medical Council (GMC) about the fitness to practise of medical practitioners who are connected to them.

The CQC does not regulate individual clinicians but would share any specific concerns with the relevant healthcare regulator in consultation with the appropriate CQC Chief Inspector.

Independent providers are subject to the CQC’s regulatory framework and must meet the fundamental standards of care under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. These include requirements for safe care and treatment, good governance, staffing, and duty of candour, which require providers to ensure safe and effective care, maintain effective governance systems to identify and address risks, and act in an open and transparent way.

Providers must notify the CQC of certain incidents, for instance deaths or allegations of abuse. The CQC uses this information to assesses services and where regulatory requirements are not met, can take enforcement action.

Following the Paterson Inquiry recommendations, the Department has worked with the Medical Defence Union, the Medical Protection Society, and the Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland to introduce a sector-led voluntary Code of Practice on 6 January 2025. The code aims to improve the transparency and clarity of medical defence organisations’ operations and the discretionary indemnity they provide healthcare professionals whose activities, for instance private practice, are not covered by state schemes.

The code is currently undergoing a short-term independent implementation evaluation commissioned by the Department through the National Institute for Health and Care Research. This will be followed by an impact evaluation to determine whether further interventions are required.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) expects all health and social care registered providers in England, including those in the independent sector, to meet the fundamental standards of care and quality. The standards include person-centred care, dignity and respect, consent, safety, and safeguarding from abuse. If providers are not meeting these fundamental standards, the CQC can take enforcement action.

The principles in the Medical Practitioners Assurance Framework have been adopted by the CQC into the single assessment framework and sector guidance, and these principles are assessed during inspections of independent healthcare services.

The Government’s regulatory reform programme will modernise the legislative frameworks for healthcare professionals in the United Kingdom. We are currently consulting on the draft General Medical Council Order, with further information available on the GOV.UK website, and this includes provisions that aim to deliver greater collaboration between regulators, and organisations and persons listed in Article 14 of the order. The intention is to improve the regulation of health and care professionals and the services they provide or contribute to. This could be through engagement or by sharing of information. The same provisions will be rolled out to the rest of the professional regulators when their legislation is subsequently modernised.

Under the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) assessment framework, the CQC assesses providers for multidisciplinary teams (MDT) working under the quality statement, How staff, teams and services work together. Where this quality statement is assessed for individual services, an assessment report with the CQC’s findings is published on the CQC website.

The CQC is currently consulting on sector-specific assessment frameworks following reviews into their operational effectiveness by Dr Penny Dash, Sir Professor Mike Richards, and the Care Provider Alliance. MDT working would be assessed in future under the hospitals framework, both secondary and specialist care, via the Safe systems, pathways and transitions key line of enquiry and via the Delivering evidence-based care and treatment key line of enquiry.

It has not proved possible to respond to this question in the time available before Prorogation. Ministers will correspond directly with the Member.

All doctors are expected to meet the standards set out in the General Medical Council’s (GMC’s) Good Medical Practice, which states that doctors must ensure patients are given the time and support they need to make informed decisions. Doctors must also follow the GMC’s guidance Decision making and consent, which came into effect in November 2020. The guidance sets out seven principles of decision making and consent, including giving patients the information they need to make a decision and the time and support they need to understand it.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) considers GMC guidance and standards when conducting assessments. The CQC can act if a provider is failing to ensure that consent is being obtained lawfully.

NHS England has integrated decision support tools into elective pathways of care. These tools support two stage shared decision making, which introduces a period of reflection for patients when deciding on treatment options and giving consent. This allows patients to take the time to fully understand the benefits and risks of treatment, talk with friends and family, and decide whether it is the most suitable option for them.

The National Consultant Information Programme (NCIP) is a platform that is available to 10,000 National Health Service clinicians in England, providing a single source of robust, nationally benchmarked data at an individual consultant level. Updated quarterly, it contains over 6,000 clinical metrics, including volumes, readmissions, revisions, length of stay, mortality, and is already being used for clinical improvement, appraisal, and revalidation of consultant surgeons in the NHS.

The platform seeks to support clinical oversight by giving medical directors, responsible officers, and specialty clinical leads access to the data for the consultants they are responsible for, supporting their statutory responsibilities for ensuring clinical quality and safety.

Once it is fully developed and embedded in clinical practice with the full support of clinical bodies, NCIP will consult with interested parties, including patient representatives, as to what is appropriate and informative for publication.

The Government is committed to fulfilling the recommendation arising from the Paterson Inquiry. Information will be published in due course.