Backbench Business Committee
Tuesday 1st September 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 3 weeks, 5 days ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
17:15
Bob Blackman
-
-
Bob Blackman
Welcome to the meeting of the Backbench Business Committee. The first meeting after the summer recess, where we'll be considering applications from colleagues for debates in both the chamber and in Westminster Hall. The first application we have before us is an application for a debate on baby loss, and we've got Andy McNay and Michelle Welsh presenting the bid. Please present your case. This is a request for a debate in the chamber for three hours.
17:15
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yes, we're looking for a debate in the chamber during Baby Loss Awareness Week, which is the ninth, the 15th of October. This House has held a debate, I think every year during that that that week for ten years, although I think last year when we had it in the chamber itself, was the first time it had been in there for, for many years. And I think, well, I'd like to think we're all aware of just how impactive and important that debate was.
And it came at a crucial time as work was starting on Baroness Amos National Maternity investigation, and it played a really crucial role in, I think, doing, in part, rebuilding some trust with families and others who've been impacted by baby loss, which remains, you know, a terrible thing for anyone to go through, but also for nationally, something that I think we we recognise we need to address as a vital priority across government. Since then, we've had Baroness Amos reporting on the national investigation, but also the Ockenden report.
And if anything, I think the importance of a debate in the chamber has become even greater. The. There is a huge amount of work that needs to be done to put. To pull the recommendations from all the reviews in. To make them reality, to build trust that we are going to deliver the changes that people want to see at the level, at a national level, that to make the fundamental change to maternity safety, to get back to listening to parents, to eliminate disparities between due to ethnicity or deprivation, to to reintroduce a safety culture and a system change that we need to see across the NHS.
And that debate will play a vital role in pulling together the various threads of work that have been done across government. But also, I think, crucially as these things must, is holding government ministers to account for the progress they've made to date, because this is something where I think families rightly expect the work to be done with urgency, to be done with ambition, and where we need to see that that be manifest in the House. But so really crucial, really important moment, really important to families.
And I hope you support it. But I'll hand it to Michelle to say to, to, to fill in what I've forgotten.
And it came at a crucial time as work was starting on Baroness Amos National Maternity investigation, and it played a really crucial role in, I think, doing, in part, rebuilding some trust with families and others who've been impacted by baby loss, which remains, you know, a terrible thing for anyone to go through, but also for nationally, something that I think we we recognise we need to address as a vital priority across government. Since then, we've had Baroness Amos reporting on the national investigation, but also the Ockenden report.
And if anything, I think the importance of a debate in the chamber has become even greater. The. There is a huge amount of work that needs to be done to put. To pull the recommendations from all the reviews in. To make them reality, to build trust that we are going to deliver the changes that people want to see at the level, at a national level, that to make the fundamental change to maternity safety, to get back to listening to parents, to eliminate disparities between due to ethnicity or deprivation, to to reintroduce a safety culture and a system change that we need to see across the NHS.
And that debate will play a vital role in pulling together the various threads of work that have been done across government. But also, I think, crucially as these things must, is holding government ministers to account for the progress they've made to date, because this is something where I think families rightly expect the work to be done with urgency, to be done with ambition, and where we need to see that that be manifest in the House. But so really crucial, really important moment, really important to families.
And I hope you support it. But I'll hand it to Michelle to say to, to, to fill in what I've forgotten.
17:17
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
And thank you. And just to declare an interest, I am the national maternity adviser to the government. So I just wanted to make that clear before. There are a number of reasons why this debate is so important. The fact that it affects every single constituency in this country, there is not a constituency that this does not affect in one way or another. We have had the Baroness Amos inquiry that will involve us working cross-party to ensure ensure that actually women have safe births in this country, because that is not happening in many, many areas of this country.
We had the Donna Ockenden review, which was the biggest NHS maternity scandal in NHS history, reporting back of hundreds and hundreds of families that have been affected. But in addition to that, we have a leads inquiry starting in a matter of weeks. We have a Sussex inquiry starting after that and we have the potential for an inquiry as well. The fact that we are working so well, cross-party helps with this issue and we have to keep talking about it, and we all know in this room that the minute we stop talking about it, the minute it can become not an issue.
And actually we need to keep this on the radar. We owe it to people within this country. And as I said, it affects every single community. And not to go over what my honourable friend has just said, but to say quite clearly, the fact that we are working cross-party on this tells us all something. It tells us that this is important to everybody. We keep talking about it in Parliament.
This is an absolute crucial time. We are at a crossroads and actually, if we don't get the investment that we need in maternity services, we won't see the improvement that we so desperately need. At the moment, the government is considering all of the recommendations from those inquiries. This debate will allow us to cross-party, have that debate, have that discussion and put over why. Actually, improvement in maternity services is so vitally important for every single community and every single constituency.
And my last point is, a lot of these babies that have sadly passed away, have passed away under really awful circumstances. It also actually has as a as a house allows us the opportunity to pay respects to those babies, to those mothers, and to those families that have lost what is the most precious thing in their whole life. And actually, that is what we're about as well. So crossroads, a huge, huge opportunity.
And actually, if this isn't what we're here for, then I don't know what we are here for. Thank you.
We had the Donna Ockenden review, which was the biggest NHS maternity scandal in NHS history, reporting back of hundreds and hundreds of families that have been affected. But in addition to that, we have a leads inquiry starting in a matter of weeks. We have a Sussex inquiry starting after that and we have the potential for an inquiry as well. The fact that we are working so well, cross-party helps with this issue and we have to keep talking about it, and we all know in this room that the minute we stop talking about it, the minute it can become not an issue.
And actually we need to keep this on the radar. We owe it to people within this country. And as I said, it affects every single community. And not to go over what my honourable friend has just said, but to say quite clearly, the fact that we are working cross-party on this tells us all something. It tells us that this is important to everybody. We keep talking about it in Parliament.
This is an absolute crucial time. We are at a crossroads and actually, if we don't get the investment that we need in maternity services, we won't see the improvement that we so desperately need. At the moment, the government is considering all of the recommendations from those inquiries. This debate will allow us to cross-party, have that debate, have that discussion and put over why. Actually, improvement in maternity services is so vitally important for every single community and every single constituency.
And my last point is, a lot of these babies that have sadly passed away, have passed away under really awful circumstances. It also actually has as a as a house allows us the opportunity to pay respects to those babies, to those mothers, and to those families that have lost what is the most precious thing in their whole life. And actually, that is what we're about as well. So crossroads, a huge, huge opportunity.
And actually, if this isn't what we're here for, then I don't know what we are here for. Thank you.
17:20
17:20
Will Stone
-
-
Will Stone
As it currently stands, the committee doesn't know what dates we're going to be allocated the first week after conference. But that being said, if we could, would you be happy with Monday, the 12th of October? I'd also say, just to note that on the first day back, there are sometimes you you cues which could eat into your time.
17:20
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yeah. So yeah, so it's the last time we did have the Monday and we did start it, I think 9:00 and finished at 12. So I was wondering whether there's an opportunity on Thursday, which would be the 15th, correspond to the wave of light, which is the final part of the Baby Loss Awareness Week. I don't know if you've ever been on it, Michelle.
17:21
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
And one of the requests with regards to that, there was quite a lot of families that wanted to be there, and a lot of members of Parliament do read out baby's names or mothers that have lost their lives through what is maternity. And so actually, what happened, there were families there the whole day, but had to go before they heard their baby's name read out. So and it just getting pushed until later in the day. So if there is anything that we could do with regards to to that, then we would really appreciate that.
But actually the main thing is really for us to have it in that week. But that can greater consideration would be very much appreciated.
But actually the main thing is really for us to have it in that week. But that can greater consideration would be very much appreciated.
17:21
Bob Blackman
-
-
Bob Blackman
Thank you. The reason why obviously raises the issue is that the first day back after a recess is often time when the government will give us time for such a debate. We probably won't get the Thursday as well as the Monday is probably the crutch, but you can help us by persuading the leader of the House to allocate that Thursday to us, and then we'll meet you halfway by agreeing that you should debate should be that day.
17:22
17:22
17:22
17:22
17:22
17:22
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
And thank you to the committee for considering this. You may be aware that you you have to be aware of the issue surrounding water, not just Thames Water, but every single region in England and the level of public concern about this situation. I know it's something that's been in the media headlines over the summer with the droughts, the hosepipe bans, and then obviously the flash floods that were in part caused by the growing scale of the climate crisis and its impact here on our our water.
We have since, I think, going back into history, been a water rich country in society. We're now entering a phase where that is ending. We will now, according to the latest government statistics, be approximately 5,000,000,000l a day short within the next 20 years, and that's before the government's own data centre planning and increased house building has been included in that. In that calculation, it's a very clearly water, which is probably one of the most critical resources this country has, is a hot topic of discussion.
And obviously with Thames Water in the news, and because of the fact that the government has now said it wants to go away and consider the SARS regime and how it's going to impact on any kind of decision going forward, because clearly , Thames Water is key to that. One of the things that we have never discussed in this House, even in my private member's bill, I wasn't able to use the term public ownership because of the cost implications, which would have meant I would have had an even a money bill on top of that.
So we weren't able to do it. There hasn't been a debate on the issue of ownership of water in this in this place for a long time. And I know that there are two other debates that are scheduled. There's one which has come about through the Petitions Committee, which I think takes place in two weeks time that was submitted and came through after I'd made this application. The other application by, I think, the honourable my honourable friend for honourable member for I think it's Bury St Edmunds.
He's doing. He's tied. He's entitled A Dirty Business, which is based on the channel four documentary, which got a lot of public attention. That's kind of focusing more on public health, which is, you know, an integral part of this, but it isn't. It's avoiding the crunchy issue of ownership, which is the kind of the nuts and bolts basis of why I want this debate, preferably in the main chamber, with as many MPs as possible from across the political spectrum taking part.
The key issue here, and I will I will be I don't want to be too dramatic , is that the National Risk Register, which has just been published, has said now that there is a 1 in 4 chance that within a very short time frame there may be such a drought of such dire consequences that a region would have to be evacuated, millions of people would need to leave that part of the country, some national risk register, because they wouldn't be able to be supplied with bottled water for the time required.
That's a 1 in 4 chance that the government that, you know, you know, if you put a a round in a chamber and spun the chamber, you had a 1 in 4 chance, I probably wouldn't take that chance. This is a big issue. It's not just about the cost of living. It's not just about the fact that the ecological systems of our rivers are now at tipping point. It's not just about the fact that people can no longer swim in the sea or the rivers with confidence.
It's not just about the increase in bills that are taking place. It's not just about the fact that data centres now, which will produce, which will use up vast amounts of water with unknown benefits for local communities, that will be water that isn't there for farmers, water that isn't there for house building, water that isn't there for manufacturing in other sectors. This is a massive issue, one of the most fundamental issues, and it goes to the heart of as this country moves into a deeper and deeper climate situation, like most of the world, including Europe.
And if you look at the south of Europe now in Italy, the south of France and Spain, the wildfires, the FBU are deeply concerned about the levels of water that we have in this country and their ability to be able to firefight, both now and in the future. This is a massive issue. And whether you agree with public ownership or not, the model of ownership is clearly now quite key to going forward. It's something the last government continuously sidestepped.
It, refused to acknowledge this and to talk about it. And I think, you know, given the scale of what's happening, the level of public support for some change to the ownership model, which is around about 85% on, on, on, on successive polling, there is a real appetite for this place to debate this and to give it a meaty debate, a time for people to really get stuck in and hear the arguments both for and against and, and to give this government a flavour of where the House is on this issue, which I think is really important.
We know Andy Burnham, as the Prime Minister, has spoken today about the need for more control, about change. Well, what does that control look like? You know, is it going to be something which keeps the assets in the hands of those who've done such wrong to our water system, or is it going to put it into a new ownership model? And this is what that debate would be about. And I would urge the committee to give us some time to have that fundamental debate.
We have since, I think, going back into history, been a water rich country in society. We're now entering a phase where that is ending. We will now, according to the latest government statistics, be approximately 5,000,000,000l a day short within the next 20 years, and that's before the government's own data centre planning and increased house building has been included in that. In that calculation, it's a very clearly water, which is probably one of the most critical resources this country has, is a hot topic of discussion.
And obviously with Thames Water in the news, and because of the fact that the government has now said it wants to go away and consider the SARS regime and how it's going to impact on any kind of decision going forward, because clearly , Thames Water is key to that. One of the things that we have never discussed in this House, even in my private member's bill, I wasn't able to use the term public ownership because of the cost implications, which would have meant I would have had an even a money bill on top of that.
So we weren't able to do it. There hasn't been a debate on the issue of ownership of water in this in this place for a long time. And I know that there are two other debates that are scheduled. There's one which has come about through the Petitions Committee, which I think takes place in two weeks time that was submitted and came through after I'd made this application. The other application by, I think, the honourable my honourable friend for honourable member for I think it's Bury St Edmunds.
He's doing. He's tied. He's entitled A Dirty Business, which is based on the channel four documentary, which got a lot of public attention. That's kind of focusing more on public health, which is, you know, an integral part of this, but it isn't. It's avoiding the crunchy issue of ownership, which is the kind of the nuts and bolts basis of why I want this debate, preferably in the main chamber, with as many MPs as possible from across the political spectrum taking part.
The key issue here, and I will I will be I don't want to be too dramatic , is that the National Risk Register, which has just been published, has said now that there is a 1 in 4 chance that within a very short time frame there may be such a drought of such dire consequences that a region would have to be evacuated, millions of people would need to leave that part of the country, some national risk register, because they wouldn't be able to be supplied with bottled water for the time required.
That's a 1 in 4 chance that the government that, you know, you know, if you put a a round in a chamber and spun the chamber, you had a 1 in 4 chance, I probably wouldn't take that chance. This is a big issue. It's not just about the cost of living. It's not just about the fact that the ecological systems of our rivers are now at tipping point. It's not just about the fact that people can no longer swim in the sea or the rivers with confidence.
It's not just about the increase in bills that are taking place. It's not just about the fact that data centres now, which will produce, which will use up vast amounts of water with unknown benefits for local communities, that will be water that isn't there for farmers, water that isn't there for house building, water that isn't there for manufacturing in other sectors. This is a massive issue, one of the most fundamental issues, and it goes to the heart of as this country moves into a deeper and deeper climate situation, like most of the world, including Europe.
And if you look at the south of Europe now in Italy, the south of France and Spain, the wildfires, the FBU are deeply concerned about the levels of water that we have in this country and their ability to be able to firefight, both now and in the future. This is a massive issue. And whether you agree with public ownership or not, the model of ownership is clearly now quite key to going forward. It's something the last government continuously sidestepped.
It, refused to acknowledge this and to talk about it. And I think, you know, given the scale of what's happening, the level of public support for some change to the ownership model, which is around about 85% on, on, on, on successive polling, there is a real appetite for this place to debate this and to give it a meaty debate, a time for people to really get stuck in and hear the arguments both for and against and, and to give this government a flavour of where the House is on this issue, which I think is really important.
We know Andy Burnham, as the Prime Minister, has spoken today about the need for more control, about change. Well, what does that control look like? You know, is it going to be something which keeps the assets in the hands of those who've done such wrong to our water system, or is it going to put it into a new ownership model? And this is what that debate would be about. And I would urge the committee to give us some time to have that fundamental debate.
17:28
17:28
17:28
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
I think we can. And I think after this summer, I think I know a few conservative MPs in particular, and obviously it limits its more limited because it's England. So it means you can't approach the SNP or the or any of the others plied. But I think there will be after this summer, I think there will be others who will want to have this debate, both, you know, in the opposition benches. So that's something I can go back to and try and find.
And I actually do know 2 or 3 members, I think, now will actually come on board. And I can do that.
And I actually do know 2 or 3 members, I think, now will actually come on board. And I can do that.
17:28
17:28
17:28
17:29
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
I would be happy to do that. I would be happy to merge. I would rather wait. I'm happy to wait as well. This is an issue that isn't going to go away any time soon. I'm aware if Peter is higher up on that, that list, I'm prepared to wait there. If if if that's an option to go further on into the parliamentary term into next year.
But if the committee felt that we could merge them, I'm unclear whether Peter has asked for Westminster Hall debate or a chamber of the main debate in the main chamber. I would rather a debate in the main chamber. I think it has more impact. I've done multiple debates in Westminster Hall on this issue from other people, so I am prepared to do that. But I would like to go into the main hall and I am prepared to wait.
But if the committee felt that we could merge them, I'm unclear whether Peter has asked for Westminster Hall debate or a chamber of the main debate in the main chamber. I would rather a debate in the main chamber. I think it has more impact. I've done multiple debates in Westminster Hall on this issue from other people, so I am prepared to do that. But I would like to go into the main hall and I am prepared to wait.
17:29
17:30
17:30
17:30
17:30
17:30
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Thank you, chair, and thank you to committee for seeing me. And welcome back. Of course. Yes, as has just been outlined, this is about having a debate around nursing a general debate. I'm sure committee members know that the nursing workforce is the largest part of our NHS, but across the country, they're currently working under sustained pressure due to unsafe staffing levels. In some cases poor retention and underinvestment in nursing education. Of course, nursing is critical to delivering the ten year NHS ten year plan.
I'm amazed that we still don't have the workforce plan to accompany it, but while we don't have it, it would be a good opportunity for members to reinforce the importance of nursing within the context of that plan. Because, of course, although funding is positive, it doesn't guarantee that there will be staff beds and that there will be appropriate discharge capacity, that community nurses will be available when and where they're needed, or that there will be safe nurse to patient ratios.
So these are all the things that I think could be talked about in a debate. Three key areas that are of interest to me. Firstly district nursing. So in Nottinghamshire at the moment there's around 40 district nurse vacancies. And what that means is that we're seeing specialist nurses having to give up their time to support those gaps in the workforce. But that in turn means that we are seeing pressures elsewhere.
So we have that type of issue. A second key challenge is around training routes. So again in Nottingham at my home university, Nottingham University, they are proposing to cut certain training courses for children and mental health nursing, which of course will have consequences locally. But that's not just a Nottingham problem. I understand that Cardiff University narrowly avoided making similar decisions, that some Scottish universities have cut training routes and Northern Ireland as well.
There are challenges there, so this will apply to constituencies across the UK. And thirdly, we have nurses in general practice, so they face the further difficulty of the fact that despite the fact that they're delivering NHS funded care, they are doing so as employees of their practice, which means that pay and conditions, maternity leave, etc. can vary quite widely from one practice to the next. And so these are just some of the issues that I have have been raised with me as a local MP, and I would like an opportunity for us to debate, to do debate then as a House.
So the proposal is that members can join together, raise issues on behalf of their constituents and their local icbs, and that we can press the government to ensure that nursing staff are properly consulted, but also properly included in the workforce plan when it arrives. So, chair, on that basis, I am requesting a half day debate in the chamber, but I am happy to be flexible, and I do have strong cross-party backing for this debate.
I'm amazed that we still don't have the workforce plan to accompany it, but while we don't have it, it would be a good opportunity for members to reinforce the importance of nursing within the context of that plan. Because, of course, although funding is positive, it doesn't guarantee that there will be staff beds and that there will be appropriate discharge capacity, that community nurses will be available when and where they're needed, or that there will be safe nurse to patient ratios.
So these are all the things that I think could be talked about in a debate. Three key areas that are of interest to me. Firstly district nursing. So in Nottinghamshire at the moment there's around 40 district nurse vacancies. And what that means is that we're seeing specialist nurses having to give up their time to support those gaps in the workforce. But that in turn means that we are seeing pressures elsewhere.
So we have that type of issue. A second key challenge is around training routes. So again in Nottingham at my home university, Nottingham University, they are proposing to cut certain training courses for children and mental health nursing, which of course will have consequences locally. But that's not just a Nottingham problem. I understand that Cardiff University narrowly avoided making similar decisions, that some Scottish universities have cut training routes and Northern Ireland as well.
There are challenges there, so this will apply to constituencies across the UK. And thirdly, we have nurses in general practice, so they face the further difficulty of the fact that despite the fact that they're delivering NHS funded care, they are doing so as employees of their practice, which means that pay and conditions, maternity leave, etc. can vary quite widely from one practice to the next. And so these are just some of the issues that I have have been raised with me as a local MP, and I would like an opportunity for us to debate, to do debate then as a House.
So the proposal is that members can join together, raise issues on behalf of their constituents and their local icbs, and that we can press the government to ensure that nursing staff are properly consulted, but also properly included in the workforce plan when it arrives. So, chair, on that basis, I am requesting a half day debate in the chamber, but I am happy to be flexible, and I do have strong cross-party backing for this debate.
17:33
17:33
17:33
Jonathan Davies
-
-
Jonathan Davies
Thank you. Chair. You don't actually have enough opposition signatories to have a chamber debate. You need seven. And I think we've got one, two, three, four, five, five here. So you have two options. Either get some more opposition members or have a Westminster Hall debate on a Tuesday or Thursday for 90 minutes.
17:34
17:34
17:34
17:34
17:34
17:35
17:35
17:35