Source · Select Committees · Health and Social Care Committee
Recommendation 5
5
Accepted
Paragraph: 26
Empower local ICS leaders to take ownership of improving vaccination uptake.
Conclusion
We agree that there is a need for national oversight of vaccination programmes and the value of this was clear during the Covid-19 pandemic. However, with routine immunisation programmes, the role of the Government and, in particular, NHS England must be limited to the more strategic, national level. Local ICS leaders, public health directors and health and care professionals have the best knowledge of the factors driving lower uptakes and the interventions needed to try and tackle that. As such, ICS leadership must step-up and take ownership of improving uptake in their area, and be supported to do so.
Government Response Summary
The government described existing national oversight roles (DHSC, UKHSA, JCVI) and processes for new immunisation products. It stated it is working with JCVI and UKHSA to support resources for outbreak response and improvement of existing programmes, and mentioned funding for MHRA to bring innovative medicines to market.
Paragraph Reference:
26
Government Response
Accepted
HM Government
Accepted
The regulatory and delivery processes for the introduction of new medicines, including novel vaccines, is outlined in Annex A, for which partner organisations own planning responsibility. In the Department’s sponsorship capacity, DHSC continues to monitor partners’ role in supporting the introduction of such medicines. The Department recognises the key role of UKHSA in providing secretariat, modelling and health economics capacity support for JCVI as captured in the Department’s strategic remit letter to UKHSA7 and UKHSA’s 3-year strategic plan8. The UK system for reviewing new immunisation products for potential programmes is effective and responsive. It is grounded in scientific review of evidence and allows for a fast response to outbreaks, and to new products being developed. The JCVI membership is comprised of experts in a wide range of relevant fields and their combined expertise ensures robust and timely review of new and emerging evidence in the field. If it is needed, the JCVI can recruit members with specific skills and expertise to its sub- committees. These sub-committees then report to the main committee. 6 Government response to the Lord O’Shaughnessy review into commercial clinical trials in the UK - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) 7 Letter from Maria Caulfield MP to Professor Dame Jenny Harries, UKHSA chief executive - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) 8 UKHSA 3 year strategy (publishing.service.gov.uk) JCVI reviews modelling work to assess a potential vaccination programme’s cost- effectiveness and impact. Where necessary, second opinion modelling may also be sought. Various modelling groups have supported the JCVI including UKHSA modellers and academic groups. DHSC also commissions second-opinion modelling to support the work of the JCVI via the Mathematical & Economic Modelling for Vaccination and Immunisation Evaluation (MEMVIE) project. During the COVID-19 pandemic, modelling resource was pivoted to focus on the COVID-19 response and therefore was not available for other vaccination programme work. The Department is working closely with the JCVI and UKHSA to support resources being available to support outbreak response, as with the London polio response, and regular improvement of all extant immunisation programmes, as with the recent changes to Shingles and HPV programmes. This support includes funding for external modelling contracts as well as internal resource allocation. At Spring Budget, the Chancellor announced a total of £10 million over the next two years for MHRA to help bring innovative new medicines and medical technologies to UK patients more quickly. The funding will be used to accelerate routes for bringing innovative medical products developed in the UK onto the market, as well as the those made and approved by other trusted regulatory partners globally.