Fifty-Third Report - Covid 19: supporting the vulnerable during lockdown
Select Committee
Public Accounts Committee
HC 938
21 April 2021
Government response
Treasury minutes: Government response to the Committee of Public Accounts on the Fifty-third report from Session 2019-21 · published 2 Sep 2021
Recommendations & Conclusions
5 results
5
Recommendation
Rejected
MHCLG and DHSC do not know whether 800,000 clinically extremely vulnerable people slipped through the...
Recommendation
MHCLG and DHSC do not know whether 800,000 clinically extremely vulnerable people slipped through the net and missed out on much needed support. DHSC explains that it took a ‘multi-channel’ approach to engaging with those affected. Through this approach, it …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government rejects the recommendation, stating that all reasonable steps were taken to alert CEV individuals and provide support, with local councils confirming through outcomes data that most needs were met.
HM Treasury
View Details
11
Conclusion
Rejected
As well as NHS Digital using patient data to add people to the shielding list,...
Conclusion
As well as NHS Digital using patient data to add people to the shielding list, GPs and hospital doctors were asked to review the list and use their clinical judgement to add or remove people. GP and hospital doctors’ additions …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government explicitly disagrees with the conclusion that it took too long to identify CEV people, asserting that it worked as quickly as possible. While generally committed to learning lessons for future data use, it does not address the reported delays in people receiving shielding letters.
HM Treasury
View Details
21
Conclusion
Rejected
Government used a range of ways to engage with clinically vulnerable people, to advise them...
Conclusion
Government used a range of ways to engage with clinically vulnerable people, to advise them to shield and how to register to access support.51 Government wanted all affected to register whether they needed support or not. NHSE&I and DHSC were …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government explicitly disagrees with the conclusion, stating it has taken all reasonable steps to alert CEV individuals to shielding guidance and support using a multi-channel approach, and defending its existing communication strategy.
HM Treasury
View Details
22
Conclusion
Rejected
DHSC and MHCLG explained that for the 800,000 vulnerable people that the contact centre could...
Conclusion
DHSC and MHCLG explained that for the 800,000 vulnerable people that the contact centre could not reach, their contact details were passed to local authorities, as it was thought local authorities might be better placed to contact these people and …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government disagrees with the Committee’s conclusion and the associated recommendation, stating that all reasonable steps were taken to alert CEV individuals and intelligence from local councils provided assurance that most were able to remain self-sufficient.
HM Treasury
View Details
25
Conclusion
Rejected
MHCLG considered that it established a communication strategy that took all reasonable steps to reach...
Conclusion
MHCLG considered that it established a communication strategy that took all reasonable steps to reach people.58 DHSC explained how it used a ‘multi-channel’ approach to communicate with clinically vulnerable people: its preference was to contact people using letters first as …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government explicitly disagrees with the committee's conclusion, asserting that it took all reasonable steps to alert CEV individuals to guidance and support, and that some people chose not to register their needs.
HM Treasury
View Details