I reiterate my deepest sympathies to all those who have experienced harm following vaccination and to their families. I recognise many of the concerns that campaigners have raised regarding the vaccine damage payment scheme. Their input will shape our ongoing consideration of reforms to the scheme and I will keep Parliament updated as appropriate.
My constituent Kelly Hatfield sadly lost her father Ken Purnell as a result of the covid-19 vaccination. The family received a vaccine damage payment, yet the sum, which has not increased since 2007, falls short of the loss, trauma and long-term financial impact on these families. Will the Minister explain why that one-off payment has not been inflation-adjusted and will she commit to reviewing its adequacy and fairness?
The vaccine damage payment scheme is not a compensation scheme but a one-off payment. It is important to state that. As I have said, we recognise that there are concerns, which campaigners have raised, and their input is shaping our ongoing consideration of reforms to the scheme. All vaccines in the UK are authorised by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, which is an independent body recognised globally for its high safety standards. This Labour Government base our decisions on scientific fact, unlike Reform, which has still not apologised for platforming dangerous anti-vax conspiracy theories. I can only assume that it is less interested in protecting people than it is in alarming folk for political advantage.
This Government have invested an extra £26 billion in the NHS, delivered 5 million more appointments in our first year and cut waiting lists by more than 200,000. We are also tackling the NHS postcode lottery. Patients should not have to wait longer for worse care because of where they live. Our new NHS league tables shine a light on the poorest performers so they receive the extra support and accountability needed to turn them around. The best leaders are being sent into the most challenged trusts to turn them around, failing managers will have their pay docked and persistent failure will lead to restrictions on boards, as we saw in Leeds this week. We will not tolerate failure.
In Telford and wider Shropshire, we know that the NHS has an absolute mountain to climb after years of underperformance. We have begun that journey with falling waiting times, increased Government investment and plans for Telford’s first ever cancer treatment unit. Will the Secretary of State ensure that trusts that show signs of improvement are backed to catch up with the rest and continue their improvements, particularly with investment in technology, research and infrastructure?
Absolutely. My hon. Friend deserves real credit for championing Telford and Shropshire and helping to get the trust the investment it needs. He is right that local services have not been good enough for a number of years. We will not turn a blind eye to that failure; we will do something about it. There is a long way to go, but we have already delivered an extra 94,000 appointments and cut waiting lists by over 14,000 at his local trust since the general election—so a lot done, but lots more to do.
I see the Health Secretary is having a bust-up with the Chancellor over who pays his £1.3 billion redundancy bill for breaking up NHS England. Will he guarantee that, once he has resolved his differences with the Chancellor, not a single penny will be taken from delivering frontline health and social care services or from underperforming NHS trusts to pay for making staff redundant?
The hon. Gentleman should not believe everything he reads in the newspapers. I make no apology for trying to cut unnecessary bureaucracy in large national organisations to redeploy savings to frontline services. His Government really should have taken a leaf out of our book.
The Secretary of State need look no further than Homerton university hospital in Hackney for good performance: it has managed to increase productivity by over 11%. What is he doing to support great leaders who deliver great progress and to make sure that they have the funding they need to continue with that?
I was delighted to meet my hon. Friend only recently to hear about the really impressive productivity gains being made at her local trust. I am keen to learn more. We need to incentivise and reward leaders for that kind of outstanding performance and we also need to get some of that best practice to some of our poorest performing trusts.
Oxford university hospitals trust is one of just three trusts that do not provide givinostat for Duchenne through the early access programme. Last week, I attended a roundtable at which one of my constituents, Alex, advocated on behalf of his son, Ben, who is not getting the treatment. We discussed lessons learned from the early access programme. Will the Secretary of State meet me, Duchenne UK and the all-party parliamentary group on access to medicines and medical devices so that we can share those lessons with him?
I have had the privilege of meeting some of the campaigners, and particularly the young people affected by that cruel condition, and I understand the hon. Gentleman’s frustrations. I know that the medication is being put through the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence process, and I hope that that will deliver a positive outcome. I would be delighted to keep him apprised of progress.
Can I just suggest to Members that their supplementary question should relate to the tabled question? That would be helpful. I call the shadow Minister.
With reports of over £1 billion in costs for integrated care board redundancies and the chief executive officer of NHS England warning that services could have to move to plan B, could the Secretary of State set out what plan B is?
We are absolutely committed to delivering the transformation that we have outlined, and we are working with ICB leaders and NHS leaders to do that in a timely way. Those savings will deliver better value for money and enable us to redeploy resources to the frontline where they belong.
I thank the Secretary of State for his answer, but waiting lists have risen for three successive months now, doctors are on strike, GPs are in formal dispute with the Government, and the ICBs are cutting 50% of their staff and do not have £1 billion to pay for it, all while the NHS 10-year plan has been published but with no delivery chapter. When will the Secretary of State come to the House with the delivery plan for the NHS 10-year plan?
Not only have the Conservatives failed to get in the news, but they have clearly not been reading it either. There have been no doctors strikes in the NHS since before the summer, and we have sat down with resident doctors and their new leadership to try to avert future strike action. The hon. Gentleman is right to point out that the action taken by the previous committee—unnecessary and irresponsible as it was—has impacted on waiting lists in the last few months, as have higher levels of demand than anticipated. I say that by way of explanation, by the way, not by way of excuse. I am determined to make sure that we hit our target, as outlined in the Government’s plan for change, and I think he will find that in the coming months we will be back on track and well on course to achieving something that the Conservatives failed to do when they had the chance.
I am deeply concerned by the state of maternity care that we inherited in the NHS. That is why I have asked Baroness Amos to chair an independent investigation into NHS maternity and neonatal services. Families deserve truth and justice, there must be accountability for failings, and services must improve. I am committing to doing whatever it takes to provide patients and babies with safe, comfortable and dignified care.
I should also inform the House that this week I have announced an inquiry into failings at the Leeds teaching hospital trust. I am working with the families affected to agree on a chair and terms of reference, and I will keep the House updated on next steps.
Pregnancy can be a worrying time for any expectant parent, and knowing they can access their GP to see a person face to face is hugely important. That was denied to my constituent, Hayley Johnson, who sadly went on to lose her baby, Evelyn, when she was delivered in an emergency at 26 weeks and six days due to a huge misdiagnosis given over the phone. With regard to maternity support specifically, what is the Minister doing to ensure that excellent maternity care is delivered in local communities so that that never happens to another family, and that when the very worst does happen and parents are suffering the loss of a baby, the support also extends to bereavement counselling?
I thank my hon. Friend for the work she is doing to campaign for better support in this space and for raising these tragic cases, not just today but in her powerful contribution to last week’s debate. She is right to say that GPs are critical for supporting women during pregnancy, providing compassionate physical and mental health care and signposting relevant services, which is why continuity is important. I am happy to report to her that, in terms of mental health and bereavement support, a record number of women accessed a specialist community perinatal mental health service or maternal mental health service in the 12 months to July 2025, but clearly there is much more to do. We have announced a £36.5 million package for bespoke perinatal mental health and parent infant relationship support as part of the continuation of the family hubs and Start for Life programme, but as we heard in last week’s debate, although a lot has been done, there is so much more to do.
Safe maternity care depends on adequate staffing, and we on these Benches have been calling for better recruitment and retention of staff in women’s health services for a long time now. Can the Secretary of State outline what specific measures the Government are taking to address the shortage of midwives and specialist neonatal nurses across England?
We need to make sure that there is better staffing and that we have the right people in the right place. I should just caution the House, though, because in recent years there has been an increase in staffing but not a corresponding increase in the quality of care, so we have to make sure we are looking at this issue in a nuanced way. It is about having the right staff in the right place at the right time to deliver safe maternity and perinatal services, and that is exactly what we will do.
Our maternity wards are in a state of crisis, with death and injury rising at an alarming rate. Sadly, this issue is not confined to Shropshire, and there has been a steady drumbeat of maternity scandals, with review after review finding consistent failings across the NHS. Can the Secretary of State explain to me and the many mothers I have met who have faced tragedy and unacceptable trauma why the Government are cutting national service development funding—ringfenced funding to improve maternity care—by more than 95% and why the immediate and essential actions from the Ockenden review into the failings at Shrewsbury and Telford hospital trust, which were to be implemented nationwide, are still not in place more than three years later?
We really are not; what we have done is devolve funding and responsibility to local level, which we think is the right thing to do. If I may say so, it is quite irresponsible to suggest that maternity funding and funding for services has been cut in the way that the hon. Lady describes. I think it causes unnecessary concern. We are taking into account the recommendations made by Donna Ockenden, as well as a wide range of other reviews and inquiries, as part of Baroness Amos’s rapid investigation, because I, like the hon. Member, want to see rapid improvement in maternity services across the country.
Children’s hospices provide crucial support, but for too long they have faced the cliff edge of annual funding cycles. I am really proud that we have provided certainty with a three-year funding settlement of £80 million, giving children’s hospices the stability and predictability they need to plan properly and focus on caring for seriously ill children and their families and loved ones. I am sure that the hon. Member will join me in welcoming the certainty that we have delivered for the sector.
I absolutely welcome the Government’s announcement last week that funding for children’s hospices will be extended for the next three years and will rise in line with inflation. Julia’s House is one such hospice that serves families in my constituency. However, children’s hospices still face challenges in accessing funding from local NHS bodies and councils, addressing workforce shortages and holding integrated care boards to account for the way in which they commission children’s palliative care, so what reassurance can the Minister give that children’s hospices will benefit from sustainable financial support both now and in the future?
I am delighted that Julia’s House hospice received £525,000 from the allocation. I am sure that was very welcome to the staff and the families. It is also worth noting that, of the £100 million allocation that we made to capital funding, £12 million went to children’s hospices. That is an increase on top of what we have just been talking about. Of course, there are challenging times for funding, but we have also provided the sector with a huge amount of certainty and stability.
This funding is welcome, but hospices such as Mountbatten in my area are still making cuts because of the budgetary choices that the Chancellor made and ICB practices. This is a multi-year funding settlement, but multi-year funding settlements need to be longer. Will the Minister commit to including all hospices in a longer multi-year funding settlement for stability in the sector?
I find it quite extraordinary that Opposition Members come to this House and lecture us on the sustainability of funding, given the way in which they crashed the economy and left us in a dire fiscal position. I would have hoped that the hon. Gentleman would welcome the fact that, rather than the annual funding cliff edge that they left for vital children’s hospices services, we have moved to a three-year funding settlement. His criticism beggars belief.
The Conservative Government’s promise of 40 new hospitals by 2030 was a fantasy—there was no funding beyond last March. In January, we published a realistic plan that put the programme on a credible and sustainable footing. We are committed to delivering all the schemes in the programme and are moving at pace with funding in place for design work, construction activity and business case development.
The Conservatives still have not apologised for the appalling state that they left our NHS in. Torbay hospital is the third oldest hospital in the United Kingdom. It has a tower block wreathed in scaffolding to stop bits of it falling off rather than it being under repair, and it has sewage leaks throughout. Sadly, it needs significant investment, which has been kicked into the long grass. A senior manager described the situation only this week as “dire”. Will the Minister meet me and hospital representatives to explore how we can achieve the investment to turn this round?
The hon. Member makes an excellent point; it was echoed by Lord Darzi in his report about the state of our hospitals, and I know many hon. Members have similar problems. I have visited many such hospitals and would be happy to discuss the matter with him further. I remind him that, of course, the Torbay and South Devon NHS foundation trust has been provided with £7.3 million from the estates safety fund for works at the hospital, and we are absolutely committed to ensuring that it will be developed in line with the programme.
We are putting the final nail in the coffin of the hon. Member’s party’s disastrous Lansley 2012 reorganisation—so bad that it made me become an MP. We are abolishing the world’s biggest quango, NHS England, along with 200 other bodies. The question is: why did the Conservatives not do that when they had the chance?
Yesterday I met Lila, a sixth-form student at Coombe Dean school, who raised the issue of long waiting lists for mental health services for children and young people across Devon. What action has been taken as a result of the Government’s policy of reorganising the NHS to reduce the unacceptable delays in mental health diagnosis and treatment for children and young people, particularly in constituencies such as South West Devon?
All of us as constituency MPs are fully aware of the state of mental health services, particularly for young people, which is why my hon. Friend the Minister for Care is working at pace on our manifesto commitments to support young people, particularly through schools. We also understand the difficulties that her ICB in particular has with its financial situation—something we are also targeting as part of our reforms to ensure that ICBs develop services for local people in line with the expectations that we have set them.
Likewise, in York, children and adolescent mental health services are just not working for children, who are left on waiting lists often with no management or treatment. In order really to achieve reorganisation in our NHS, would our Government look at local authorities commissioning mental health services, to deliver such services and to meet the holistic needs of young children’s development and mental health wellbeing?
Again, I echo comments on the state of mental health services, as the hon. Member has done. As it says in our manifesto, we are committed to those 8,500 extra mental health support workers in local areas such as hers. It is important that commissioners work closely with their local authorities on mental health services, and I know my hon. Friend the Minister for Care is ensuring that that happens as part of the reforms we are undertaking.
I am concerned that the disruption caused by an uncosted, unplanned simultaneous reorganisation of NHS England and the ICBs is affecting patient care. Before the summer, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation recommended that the RSV vaccine should be given to those over 80 and those in adult care homes. In July, I asked the Secretary of State to confirm that this vaccine will be available in time for the winter season, and he said,
“I can certainly reassure the shadow Minister on this.”—[Official Report, 22 July 2025; Vol. 771, c. 677.]
The winter vaccine programme started three weeks ago. Why has he not delivered on his promise?
As my right hon. Friend has just said, we have delivered on that commitment. The hon. Member talks about the reorganisation being a distraction. If her party had focused taxpayers’ money on patient services rather than ballooning bureaucracy, with costs increasing both among providers and through ICBs, we would not have inherited the mess that we did, and would be able to roll out programmes more effectively. We have committed to doing that.
I thank the hon. Lady for her answer, but I would like her to check and perhaps update the guidance for GPs and the websites that continue to say that it is only available to 80-year-olds who turned 80 after 1 September 2024, which is not all people over the age of 80.
Reorganisation is affecting delivery elsewhere, too. The Secretary of State also promised that the continued roll-out of fracture liaison services would be one of his first priorities. How many new fracture liaison services have opened since the general election?
On the hon. Lady’s first point, this Government, unlike the previous Government, do believe in experts, and we follow the clinical advice that we are given. On her second point, as she is so keen on reading our manifesto commitments, the commitment was to do that by 2030. It is currently 2025. Our reforms to ICBs and providers, bringing NHS England inside the Department of Health and Social Care to make it more democratically accountable for taxpayers, will reverse the shocking increase in funding that the previous Government put into a leaky bucket. We are fixing the foundations of the NHS. We are targeting resources at people in line with our 10-year plan.
The NHS online hospital will connect patients with clinicians anywhere in England through the NHS app. It will deliver up to 8.5 million appointments in its first three years—four times more than the average NHS trust—finally bringing the NHS into the digital age. We are cutting waiting times and providing patients with more choice and convenience.
The wellbeing of our nation’s young people remains in crisis, with one in five having a probable mental health condition and the number being referred to emergency mental health care continuing to rise. In communities like mine in Croydon East, where young people are waiting months and sometimes even years for help, families are desperate for support. How will NHS online help young people access the mental health support they need, and what impact will it have on reducing the waiting times for children and adolescent mental health services?
I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this crucial issue to light. Early access to high-quality support is critical for young people struggling with their mental health. That is backed by us with an extra £688 million this year. We are hiring more staff, expanding support teams in schools and boosting support in new Young Futures hubs so that children can get the best possible start in life. Although initially not focused on CAMHS, the scope of the NHS online hospital is a personal priority for the Prime Minister and has the capacity to grow, and we will consider incorporating it when safely able to alongside other services.
Whatever the impact of these new online services, the Opposition Front-Bench team have drawn attention to the fact that waiting lists in England have risen for the last three months. I can inform the House this morning that waiting lists in Scotland are coming down. Would the Minister like to explain why that is the case?
I am so glad the hon. Gentleman took the time to ask that question, because while we invest in digital services, Scotland and Scottish patients are still waiting for the most basic digital infrastructure. While we invest record amounts in Scotland’s budget, the SNP’s excuses keep rising. What he needs to answer is why Scottish patients are living in a digital desert, while patients here in England are getting more and more sophisticated NHS digital services.
This Government are investing an extra £26 billion in the NHS, opening up community diagnostic centres at evenings and weekends and delivering 5 million more appointments to catch cancer earlier. We are making progress: 135,000 more patients have already had cancer diagnosed or ruled out within the 28-day target compared with the previous year—a lot done, and a lot more to do.
A local teacher went to her GP with clear symptoms of a facial tumour but was told it was simply the effects of age. It took almost two years to receive a confirmed diagnosis, including eight months lost in the system after an urgent referral. Does the Minister agree that reducing times for cancer diagnosis must start with strengthening systems to support early recognition and follow-up, so that no one is left waiting? I wish the Minister well with her own cancer battle and thank her for bravely sharing her experience of living with cancer.
I thank my hon. Friend for her question and her well wishes. We are taking cancer detection seriously in general practice, and there is work to do. It is why we have recently launched Jess’s rule, which is a patient safety initiative that means when patients return three times with worsening or undiagnosed symptoms, GPs must reflect, review and rethink. That could include a second opinion, episodic continuity of care or ordering additional tests. I wish her constituent the very best and offer her my sympathies in her diagnosis.
The Government claim that they wish to reduce NHS waiting times, but I have written confirmation from the Government that they have slashed funding for community diagnostic centres. The consequences of Labour’s funding cuts mean that brand new facilities, such as those at Queen Mary’s hospital in Sidcup, for which I secured £9.6 million of funding from the last Conservative Government, can now open only two days per week. Will the Minister urgently review that funding cut, so that more patients in Bexley and across the UK can get their diagnostics quicker?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question, but I think he might be mistaken. We are opening more CDCs than ever before—I have lost count of the amount of CDCs we have been invited to open—and we are making sure that people have access to diagnostics in their community, from hospital to community, with the most access that there has been for some years.
Thanks to the decisions taken by the Chancellor at the Budget, we are investing an extra £1.1 billion in general practice—the biggest increase in a decade. That funding has allowed us to recruit an extra 2,000 GPs, agree a contract for the first time in four years, and introduce online access. Does the hon. Member welcome that investment, or would she cut it?
GPs surgeries across the Weald of Kent, including in Woodchurch and Charing, tell me how much they struggle with rising staff costs, and the national insurance increases in last year’s Budget put huge pressure on them. Alongside the investment that the hon. Gentleman just mentioned, what discussions have he or his colleagues from the Department of Health and Social Care had with Treasury colleagues about protecting GP partnerships from further NI burdens in the upcoming Budget?
Again, I find it extraordinary that Conservative Members have the brass neck to ask those kinds of questions. They created the mess, and now they are criticising us—it is a bit like the arsonists heckling the firefighters. Patient satisfaction in general practice has risen from 67% last year to 75% this year, and the proportion of patients reporting difficulty contacting their practice has fallen from 18.7% in July 2024 to 10.6% in May 2025. We are just getting started, and I did not hear the hon. Lady welcome the investment.
This Government are committed to improving survival for blood cancers, including acute myeloid leukaemia. We are raising awareness, delivering more research, and improving early diagnosis. Blood cancer is the third biggest cancer killer, and the fifth most common cancer in the UK. That is why we are committed to developing a national cancer plan, with patients at its heart, covering the cancer plan from referral and diagnosis to treatment and ongoing care. Having consulted with key stakeholders and patient groups, I confirm that that plan will be published early in the new year.
I thank the Minister for her response. My constituent Ruth Wake, who lives in Brewood, was tragically diagnosed with acute myeloid leukaemia in January last year. She has gone through chemotherapy and a stem cell transplant, and while she has made good process and is in remission, sadly the stem cell transplant has failed after nine and a half months. Under the current rules, if it fails in under a year she cannot have a second stem cell transplant. I know the pressures that the Minister is under in terms of her time, but my constituent has so little time. Could she look at this particular case, and also look at guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, which were written over 12 years ago? Science and treatment have moved so rapidly, and I wonder if the Minister could look at both those points.
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his question and offer my best wishes to his constituent Ruth in her treatment. I thank him for bringing her story to my attention. I really do appreciate—perhaps more than most—the urgency of the matter. Although I am unable to comment on individual cases, I understand that one of my ministerial colleagues will be writing to the right hon. Gentleman directly on this matter in the very near future.
This week we learned about the incredible results of the Galleri trials, which allow the early identification of many tumours by looking at DNA circulating in the blood. Indeed, I was a volunteer in this trial. Will the Secretary of State join me in recognising the central importance of medical research?
Absolutely. The new progress, particularly around circulating tumour DNA, is really interesting, and we are moving forward with more investment in research so that we can bring forward more such treatment.
We strengthened the NHS front door with £1.2 billion for general practice, the biggest cash increase in over a decade. We promised to recruit an extra 1,000 GPs in our first year—we recruited 2,000. Patients are now able to request appointments online, which is a huge step towards delivering our manifesto commitment to end the 8 am scramble.
Great Western Park has added 3,000 homes to Didcot, in my Oxfordshire constituency, and Valley Park, which is under construction, will add 4,000 more. However, the new GP surgery promised in 2008 remains a barren patch of land and existing facilities cannot cope. The integrated care board is supportive, but progress has stalled due to NHS England’s involvement. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that integrated care boards should have the authority to direct primary care funding, and will he meet me to help to unblock the new GP surgery my constituents desperately need?
Let me come back to the hon. Gentleman after I have found out what has gone wrong in this case. As he points out, ICBs are responsible for commissioning, planning, securing and monitoring GP services within their health system, through delegated responsibility from NHS England, and capital is allocated to ICBs on a basis that takes account of annual population growth. I can understand his frustration and that of his constituents, so let me find out what has gone wrong and come back to him.
After 14 years of a Conservative Government, poor access to GPs is something that we have come to know well in certain areas of my constituency of Sherwood Forest. In Hucknall, demand for GP appointments is overwhelming to the point that one practice has had to close its online system. Promises of a super-healthcare system were made by the previous Government but never delivered. Meanwhile, local Ashfield independent politicians have disgracefully used this as a political football. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that there has been far too much talk and not enough action, and that it is now time that both the integrated care board and Ashfield district council deliver on this?
It is of no surprise to me that my hon. Friend raises yet another example of Conservative broken promises, and the hot air that comes from independents, who have all the luxury of being commentators but none of the responsibility of ever having to deliver anything. I would be happy to meet her to look into what has gone wrong here. This has gone on for far too many years, and I can well understand her frustrations.
Let me be clear: this Government will always protect the NHS and have the service free at the point of use for everyone. This Government are determined to shift health out of hospitals and into the community, as set out in the 10-year plan, and neighbourhood health services will be fundamental to delivering this shift, so it is right that we look at a range of options to provide the best care for people across the country. Let me reassure hon. Members that all proposals are subject to robust, value-for-money assessments to ensure taxpayers get the best possible return on investments in our health services.
May I begin by congratulating the Secretary of State on his actions in trying to repair our cherished NHS following 14 years of Tory destruction? We must learn from past mistakes. The private finance initiative was a huge, expensive mistake—an absolute disaster—with £80 billion repaid for an investment of £13 billion. Will the Minister reassure the House that the lessons of PFI have been well learned, and that they are well and truly in the past and in the dustbin?
I thank my hon. Friend for his words of encouragement and congratulation. I assure him that lessons have been learned; we will ensure value for taxpayers’ money in all future proposals.
I meet regularly with GPs in my constituency, and they have highlighted that they do not yet have clarity or certainty about the role and resources that they will have in the roll-out of services from hospitals to communities and neighbourhood health services. Will the Minister meet me to provide that clarity to our GPs and assure them that they will be at the table during that roll-out?
It is absolutely the role of the hon. Lady’s local integrated care board to ensure that it involves all partners, particularly primary care, in the exciting roll-out of neighbourhood health services, which I think they welcome. I am happy to discuss that further with her.
As well as the record investment that we put into the NHS, we are ensuring that we get a better bang for the taxpayer’s buck. Under the Conservatives, for example, the NHS was paying £3 billion to recruitment firms for agency shifts. We have cut agency spending by a third and are abolishing it altogether, with the savings reinvested in staff pay and treatment for patients. That is just one example of how our reform agenda is good for patients and for taxpayers.
Private finance initiative deals did huge damage to NHS budgets. Despite receiving just £13 billion in assets, NHS trusts were saddled with more than £80 billion in PFI debts—most of that is still being paid back. We have even seen some hospitals spending more on PFI debts than on medicines. If they really want to cut out waste and avoid a PFI-style disaster 2.0, will the Government rule out using private finance for the new network of new NHS clinics, as has been floated?
As I answered in response to my hon. Friend the Member for Blyth and Ashington (Ian Lavery), we will absolutely ensure that we learn the lessons of the last Government’s failure.
Does the Minister agree that it is completely wasteful to make cancer patients who need to go for chemotherapy in Carlisle on a Wednesday but who live in, say, Kirkby Stephen to have to travel to Carlisle on the day or on the day before to get their bloods taken? Why is that? Because the local hospital will no longer fund the local GP surgery in Kirkby Stephen or Appleby to take their bloods there. Is it not wrong that those GP surgeries can no longer provide secondary healthcare blood services in their own settings in people’s own communities?
As he often does, the hon. Gentleman highlights in his own very rural constituency some of the fundamental problems at the heart of our NHS. That is why we are reforming it, ensuring that we move hospital services from hospitals into the community and developing neighbourhood health services. We are also looking at the financial flows in the system that lead to these sorts of perverse incentives and funding arrangements, which do damage to his constituents, as they do to many others and to rural and coastal communities. That is why we highlighted that in the 10-year plan. We need to see the end of such examples.
We have already made excellent progress, turning commitments in the women’s health strategy into tangible action. We are delivering 5.2 million extra appointments, which includes tackling gynaecology waiting lists. We know, though, that more needs to be done for women experiencing the menopause and on improving awareness and access to treatment. Menopause Mandate has long campaigned, alongside many Members in this House, for the menopause to be included in the NHS health check. I hope to be able to say more soon, but rest assured that we have heard those calls.
Earlier this year, a constituent came to speak to me about shortages of the one hormone replacement therapy drug that was working for her after years of misdiagnoses and ineffective treatment. She told me that GPs have very low awareness of menopause and often recommend alternatives that cause adverse reactions, leaving her and many other women paying for private advice and treatment and taking time off work. Will the Minister update the House on what the Department is doing to address HRT shortages and to improve training for GPs so that millions of women get the support that they need?
I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting this crucial issue. The majority of the more than 70 HRT products are in good supply, but we are aware of shortages affecting certain estradiol patches, and we are engaging with suppliers to expedite deliveries wherever we can. We have issued guidance to healthcare professionals under the serious shortage protocols methodology to enable community pharmacists to supply alternatives where appropriate. Furthermore, we are committed to funding research into women’s health, and we have invested approximately £5 million through the National Institute for Health and Care Research scheme into menopause research, including studies for new treatments to improve outcomes for women experiencing the menopause.
It is being reported in the press this week that women are being exploited by a menopause “gold rush”, enabled by tech giants such as Instagram. What steps can be taken to ensure that women have access to the very best of information and that misinformation on the internet is brought under control?
I thank the hon. Lady for highlighting this issue. The best way to do that is to beef up NHS digital services, as we are doing to the NHS digital app, so that women and all patients can have confidence in the advice that they receive.
I welcome the Chair of the Select Committee back from parental leave and greatly look forward to working with her again. Virtual wards allow patients to get hospital-level care in the comfort of their own home, speeding up their recovery while freeing up hospital beds for the patients who need them most. We are rolling out virtual wards further, so that they become the norm for managing many conditions at home.
Earlier this year, I visited the “hospital at home” team at the John Radcliffe hospital, who run an incredible virtual ward. I saw them deliver care to Mavis, who is 91. She was so emotional and grateful for the work they did—we all ended up in tears. Imagine my disappointment that while I was off, we got an email from the team saying that the funding for that incredible service is no longer there and that they face closure. This is an example of the best of the NHS. We want it rolled out to the rest, but if the funding is not there for these nascent services to find their footing, how can we ensure that best practice can be spread across the whole of Oxfordshire and beyond?
The hon. Lady makes a very valid point: this is about the shift from hospital to community, which we have to drive forward. In September 2025, 12,522 virtual ward beds were available—an increase from 12,497 in September 2024. Slowly but surely, we are increasing the number of virtual ward beds and the capability of virtual wards, but there is still a long way to go. I absolutely accept the point that the hon. Lady makes.
The Darzi investigation found that NHS resources are too focused on hospitals at the expense of community care. Our reforms will turn the NHS into more of a neighbourhood health service. We have already recruited an extra 2,000 more GPs, we are rolling out 700,000 extra dental appointments, and we have agreed a new contract of investment and reform for community pharmacy. As part of our 10-year plan, we will be rolling out neighbourhood health centres across the country, starting with the places that are in the greatest need.
I thank my hon. Friend for his answer, and for the brilliant work that the whole team is doing to put the NHS 10-year plan into action. Transferring care into the community will give many more patients quick and easy access to specialist care when they need it. However, access to Parkinson’s nurses—who are worth their weight in gold—remains deeply unequal. Too often, patients are left without nurses and have to travel a long way to see a specialist nurse. Worse still, the few Parkinson’s nurses who are available are predominantly funded by Parkinson’s UK. Can the Minister set out what steps are being taken to increase equitable access to Parkinson’s nurses across the country?
I thank my hon. Friend for that question, and congratulate him on his work campaigning on this issue. Regular support and advice from a Parkinson’s disease nurse specialist is highlighted as a key intervention in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines on Parkinson’s disease in adults. The forthcoming 10-year workforce plan will support the 10-year health plan by addressing workforce shortages and skills gaps. This will be crucial to delivering quality and accessible care for those with Parkinson’s.
Ironically, getting care out of hospitals and into the community very much depends on a functioning hospital. Last month, I met the group chief executive officer of Hull University teaching hospitals NHS trust, following news that it had been placed in segment 4 of the NHS acute trust league table. She acknowledged the urgent need for improvement and expressed clear ambition for change, but she will not be able to deliver the transformation of that important hospital alone. Could I meet the Secretary of State or Ministers to discuss what more can be done to support that hospital on its road to transformation and improvement?
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his question. I am not familiar with the details of that case, but if he would not mind writing to me, I would be very happy to take that issue forward. He is right that there is a mountain to climb, not least because of the mess that was left to us by the previous Government, but we are climbing that mountain step by step. The 10-year plan is a big step in the right direction; it is now all about delivery, and that is what we are doing every day.
Since I last answered questions in this House, the Government have announced: half a billion pounds for a fair pay agreement for care workers; NHS Online, the first ever online-only hospital trust; and £80 million for children’s hospices. We have announced an independent inquiry into maternity services in Leeds, introduced Jess’s rule, implemented online requests for GP appointments, opened the 100th community diagnostic centre, made the chickenpox vaccine available on the NHS, and published NHS league tables—a lot done; a lot more to do.
We promised 2 million more appointments, and we have delivered 5 million, along with 2,000 extra GPs, 6,500 more mental health workers, 7,000 more doctors, and 13,000 more nurses and midwives. The cancer diagnosis standard has been met, GP satisfaction is up and waiting lists are down. The brand-new Midland Metropolitan University hospital has opened in my constituency. Does the Secretary of State agree that this is the difference that a Labour Government make, and that we are only just getting started?
Why stop there? We have 15,000 more home adaptations for disabled people through the disabled facilities grant and 135,000 more suspected cancer patients receiving a diagnosis on time. We have more than 200,000 cases off the waiting list, £500 million for the first ever fair pay agreement for care workers and the biggest uplift in carer’s allowance for a generation. The Tories did not do it, and Reform would undo it. That is the difference that a Labour Government make.
First, it is great to be in this new role. I genuinely want to be part of a constructive Opposition, but equally I want to do my role in holding this Government to account. I note the lack of detail in the Secretary of State’s answers on reorganisation, so can I ask the basics again? How many people will be made redundant, what will it cost and who is paying?
I welcome the shadow Secretary of State to his place. It is good to hear from the Conservative Front Benchers; I had almost forgotten they existed. The Conservatives created a complex web of bureaucracy. It is a bit rich to complain we are not abolishing their creation quickly enough. We have had a number of expressions of interest in voluntary redundancy across my Department, NHS England and the integrated care boards, and we are working through that as we speak.
Again, the Secretary of State cannot answer. His answers are too vague. He is very good at making promises, but the facts are that he is presiding over a reorganisation that has stalled, creating uncertainty for staff. Waiting lists are up 50,000 in the past three months, hospices are in crisis because of national insurance contribution rises, and we have had strikes again—despite big pay rises—with the threat of more. If the Secretary of State wants the leadership in the future, perhaps he should show leadership in the NHS now, and tell us not just the plans, but when he will give the details and how he will deliver on his promises to patients.
Waiting lists are lower now than when Labour took office, and that is in stark contrast with the record of the Government in which the shadow Secretary of State served; waiting lists increased every single year they were in charge. This is the first year in 15 that waiting lists have fallen. That is the difference that a Labour Government make. We are only just getting started. As for leadership changes, we all know why they are calling the Leader of the Opposition “Kemi-Kaze”.
We know that there have been issues with the urgent emergency care response. We are absolutely committed to supporting ambulance trusts to continually improve the patient experience. The urgent emergency care plan for 2025-26 is backed by nearly £450 million of funding. I am happy to discuss that further with my hon. Friend.
Every year we come here to discuss the winter crisis in the NHS, but this summer saw record waits at accident and emergency, with more than 74,000 12-hour trolley waits in June and July. That used to be unheard of. With winter looming and the potential for the A&E permacrisis to be even worse this year, what package of emergency measures is the Secretary of State putting in place to ensure that patients are not left to suffer on trolleys or worse in our hospital corridors this winter?
The hon. Lady is absolutely right to point out that the NHS is already running hot ahead of winter. We brought forward our winter planning for this year to get ahead. We are making sure that all NHS trusts and systems have developed plans that have been tested regionally. The flu vaccination programme is well under way, the autumn covid-19 vaccination began on 1 October, and we are driving improvements in urgent and emergency care. This will be a challenging winter—we are not complacent about that—but we are getting the system ready for it.
As my hon. Friend will know, the consultation closed on 19 August. We are now considering the outcomes, and expect to publish a response very shortly. These reforms will improve support for patients with complex or urgent needs by better incentivising dentists to deliver this care on the NHS.
I did not hear the hon. Gentleman welcome the fact that we provided £100 million—an unprecedented amount—in capital funding for hospices, and £26 million a year and £80 million over three years for children’s hospices. We recognise that hospices benefit from being rooted in their communities, with amazing charity and philanthropy support, but of course we know that the Government need to do their bit as well, and that is precisely what we were doing. I was very pleased to visit Noah’s Ark children’s hospice in Barnet last week and to speak to the chief executive, who warmly welcomed the stability and certainty that the three-year allocation has provided.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for bringing this matter to the House’s attention. It is appalling for coffee shops to be commandeered as spaces for the care of patients, and we will not accept it. I am happy to look at the case that my hon. Friend has mentioned. We will also be publishing figures on corridor care so that we can hold the system to account, and the public can hold us to account, to improve the situation that we inherited.
As I have pointed out, we are providing unprecedented levels of funding for hospices, but there is clearly a challenging fiscal position. I note that in their manifesto the Liberal Democrats proposed to spend only an extra £8 billion on health and care, whereas we have invested £26 billion. Before calling for more spending, they should tell us what they would cut.
Through a £160 million investment in the additional roles reimbursement scheme, we have recruited more than 2,000 new GPs nationwide, but we recognise the inequities in funding that can exacerbate regional inequalities in access to services. I have launched a review of the GP funding formula to ensure that funding follows the needs of the population. The National Institute for Health and Care Research has begun a review of the Carr-Hill funding formula, which will conclude in six months’ time.
The hon. Gentleman draws to our attention the appalling state that the NHS was left in by the previous Government. We are working at pace to introduce EPRs across the system. I am sure that Ministers would be happy to look at the case at his local hospital to clean up the mess that the Conservative party left behind.
As a migraine sufferer, I am afflicted about once a week by debilitating symptoms, which always include partial blindness, and sometimes include numbness in my fingers, nausea, brain fog, sensitivity to light and sound, a pounding headache and even an inability to speak—heartbreaking for a politician. I am very lucky, though, that my migraines generally only last half an hour; other people’s can be much worse and last days. What steps is the Minister taking to improve support for migraine sufferers like me?
At national level, a number of initiatives support service improvement and better care for patients with migraine. The Getting It Right First Time neurology programme published a national specialty report that made several recommendations to improve recognition and diagnosis of migraine by GPs. Additionally, the RightCare toolkit sets out key priorities for improving care for patients with migraine, including correct identification and diagnosis, and NHS England has established a multi-year, clinically led neurology transformation programme—so, lots.
I do not know the details of that case, but if the hon. Gentleman writes to me, I can certainly come back to him on it. That sounds like a vital service that needs to be protected.
In the Secretary of State’s list of what has happened since his last oral questions, he failed to mention the appointment of our hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South West (Dr Ahmed) as a Minister. He is particularly looking at life sciences. Without life sciences and drug trials, we will not see an improvement in outcomes for rare cancers. Can the Secretary of State make a statement on what will be done about rare cancers?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to welcome my hon. Friend the Minister to his place. I will be honest: in effect, he has been a Minister since we came into government. We very much welcome the work that he has been putting in.
We are determined to do more on rare cancers, working with my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh). All the work that she is doing, particularly on rare brain cancers, is much appreciated.
Most young people referred to gender identity services are same-sex attracted, neurodiverse and/or traumatised. Looked-after children are also over-represented in this cohort. Is the Secretary of State really comfortable with children being given puberty blockers, which essentially chemically neuter them, for the purposes of the PATHWAYS clinical trial?
Within days of taking office, I upheld the judgment made by my predecessor. We need to tread carefully and be sensitive in this space. We need to take an evidence-based approach to trans healthcare in our country, and that is the approach that this Government will take.
As you may be aware, Mr Speaker, Reform-led Lancashire county council has opened a consultation on the future of care homes across Lancashire, including the proposal to close Woodlands care home in my constituency of Hyndburn. Will the Minister join me in urging Lancashire county council not to take forward these proposals, to protect much-valued local services, and to keep care close to the community and to the amazing staff who support our residents in Woodlands care home?
I absolutely agree. It has been very interesting to see that all the rhetoric of many Reform-led councils has come crashing down as they face the reality of the situation. Adult social care plays an absolutely vital role in the shift from hospital to community, and I am very happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss the matter further.
Alton and Petersfield hospitals give excellent step-up, step-down and end-of-life care. The trust is introducing more home-based care, which is good, but it also proposes closing a ward in one of the community hospitals. Will the Minister ensure that there remain sufficient beds and sufficient capacity in our local community hospitals for those patients who need them?
In September, Hampshire Hospitals NHS foundation trust reported step-down immediate care capacity as the primary reason for discharge, and at Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS trust, the discharge figure was 13% lower than the average. As important as immediate care is, we know from the evidence that getting home is better; we are putting record amounts of money into the better care fund to make that possible.
I draw Ministers’ attention to the Prostate Cancer Research report published last week. It busts the myth that a screening programme for prostate cancer would cost the NHS too much money. It would focus on the people most at risk—in other words, black men over the age of 45, and those who, like me, have a history of it in their family. Will the Secretary of State join me in commending this report to the UK National Screening Committee?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question and the inequalities to which he draws our attention. We will look at that report carefully. I am awaiting the recommendation of the UK National Screening Committee. We will look carefully at that, and I will report to the House on our decision.
The secure supply of medical radioisotopes is critical for the treatment and diagnosis of many conditions. Is this the Department’s responsibility, and does it support the Welsh Government’s Project Arthur scheme at the nuclear licenced site in Trawsfynydd in my constituency?
I thank the right hon. Member for that question. Security of supply is obviously of importance to the entire Government. My portfolio includes pharmacy, which is a very important part of that. I would be very happy to meet her to discuss further the matter she has raised.
In my constituency of Stafford, Eccleshall and the villages, I recently ran a survey, which had a whopping 99% response rate, in support of an urgent treatment centre in my constituency. Would the Minister agree to meet me to discuss urgent treatment provision in my constituency?
My hon. Friend does an excellent job in her constituency. I meet her regularly to discuss issues in her constituency, and I am very happy to discuss the provision of urgent care centres with her.
Greater transparency about NHS data should be used to drive improvements, so what assessment has the Health Secretary made of the impact on the Queen Elizabeth hospital in King’s Lynn of being forced to make savings of £18 million this year? What impact will that have on the need to reduce waiting times for A&E and cancer treatment, as identified in the league table that he published?
We are putting £26 billion more into the NHS this year, which is investment that was opposed by the Conservative party.
As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on dyslexia—an issue on which I have campaigned for many years—I remain alarmed at the high number of dyslexic people who still need to use mental health services. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how we can better serve dyslexic people in Broxtowe and across the UK, and will he consider measures to prevent more dyslexic people from needing mental health services?
I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for sharing her personal experiences, and I would be delighted to meet her.
I welcome the approval of plans for a new dental school at the University of East Anglia. What arrangements and incentives will the Minister put in place to keep dental graduates in the most poorly served areas, such as my constituency of Waveney Valley?
I thank the hon. Member for that question. He will have seen that, in the 10-year plan, we have committed to tie-ins. Once the current cohort is through its studies, new cohorts will be tied into doing NHS dentistry for a period after graduation. I am sure that he welcomes that very important measure.
Jules Fielder is a young woman from Hastings who has tragically been diagnosed with terminal lung cancer after doctors repeatedly missed the early symptoms. Jules is now channelling her personal tragedy into action and campaigning to raise awareness of early symptoms, and she wants shops like Boots and Superdrug to use their shelf space to raise awareness. Will the Minister join me in paying tribute to Jules’s amazing campaigning work?
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this issue, and I offer my sympathy and best wishes to Jules and her family. Of course, I commend her awareness-raising work, which is really important. Her experience is one of the reasons why we are rolling out targeted lung screening and starting to use artificial intelligence to detect discrepancies in screening.
Children in Runnymede and Weybridge are waiting on average two years to get a diagnosis of autism or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder from Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS foundation trust. The trust is deviating from national guidance on new developmental pathways, and waiting times are even greater if children need medication. Does the Secretary of State share my concerns, and will he investigate the trust and make sure that children and families get the support that they need?
The hon. Gentleman has considerable expertise in this field, and I am grateful to him for bringing this matter to light, but he was part of the previous Government, who let waiting lists get out of control. He will appreciate that I am unable to directly interfere in ICB decisions, but I am very happy to write to the board to ask for an update, and to update him when it replies.
My constituents’ baby, Bran Tunnicliffe, sadly died last year. His parents shared their experience with me, and described the wait for a coroner’s report as a lottery that depends on which hospital, pathologist and coroner is involved. I know that there is a shortage of pathologists in the UK. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss my constituents’ experience?
I am so sorry to hear that having experienced such unimaginable heartbreak, the family then had to go through that additional trauma. I would be delighted to meet my hon. Friend and look at what we can do together with our friends at the Ministry of Justice to improve the experience for families in that awful situation.
I can absolutely give the hon. Gentleman that commitment. I work very well with my counterparts across Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, regardless of party affiliations. I think he makes a very sensible suggestion.