Pharmacies: Government Funding

Edward Morello Excerpts

Wednesday 9th September 2026 Westminster Hall

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Betts. I congratulate the hon. Member for Leicester East (Shivani Raja) on securing the debate, which is important and timely, especially considering that we had the remaining stages of the Health Bill this week.

Community pharmacies are a vital part of the NHS, especially in places like West Dorset, where they provide essential medicines, advice and care close to home. At a time when pharmacies are facing severe financial and workforce pressures, we must recognise their contribution and ensure that they receive the funding, support and protection they need. We are asking more and more of community pharmacies, while for too long we have expected them to absorb rising costs with inadequate funding.

In West Dorset, 18 community pharmacies serve a population of around 94,000 people. In a typical month, they dispense around 155,000 prescriptions. Since the introduction of Pharmacy First in January 2024, pharmacies in West Dorset have helped to avoid as many as 8,737 GP appointments. Those figures demonstrate the enormous contribution pharmacies make to our local NHS and why we cannot afford to lose them.

Today, people are more likely to live with multiple long-term conditions, require regular prescriptions and need advice and support close to home. For someone living in a rural village, a pharmacy is the most accessible point of contact with the NHS. That is why the funding model should properly recognise rurality and population age.

Nationally, community pharmacy funding in 2025-26 was around £800 million lower in real terms than in 2015-16, despite a 16% increase in the number of NHS prescription items dispensed over that period. Since 2017, there has been a net loss of 147 bricks-and-mortar pharmacies, which is 15% of the network. I welcome the Government’s recent 10.3% funding increase, worth £340 million, but their own independent economic analysis identified a funding gap of around £2 billion, so the increase does not close the gap. Some pharmacies in West Dorset have reported to me six-figure annual shortfalls.

Poor funding leads to fewer staff, and fewer staff leads to shorter opening hours, temporary closures and fewer services being offered. It means that fewer people receive their medicines and fewer patients are able to access care. In NHS Dorset, there were 207 full-time equivalent pharmacists in 2023 and 47 vacancies, which is a vacancy rate of 19%.

In places such as West Dorset, in rural Britain, recruiting a permanent pharmacist can be extremely difficult. Pharmacies have to pay more to attract pharmacists from elsewhere or bring in locums, who have to travel significant distances. Those costs do not exist to the same extent in densely populated urban areas. It is therefore wrong to design a funding system that treats every pharmacy as if it operates in the same circumstances.

The pharmacy access scheme provides some support for isolated pharmacies, but its funding pot is just £20 million, which is nowhere near sufficient to deal with the structural challenges facing rural pharmacy provision in England. We need a funding formula that properly recognises rurality, population age, workforce pressures and the cost of serving sparsely populated communities.

Funding is only one part of the problem. We also need stronger regulation and stronger powers to intervene when large corporate pharmacy operators fail. Jhoots operated 150 branches across England. In West Dorset, its pharmacies in Bridport and Lyme Regis were closed for months, disrupting prescription access for more than 12,000 people who rely on those services. The impact was felt throughout our community. It was felt by the patients who struggled to access their medicines and by other healthcare providers who had to deal with the consequences. It was felt devastatingly by pharmacy staff. Staff across multiple sites reported going months without pay, despite receiving payslips and seeing deductions for tax and pensions. Some were unable to pay their rent or household bills, and some relied on food banks and could not buy their children school uniform.

I pay tribute to the amazing staff in Bridport and Lyme Regis for the resilience they showed during that time. The support shown to them by the local community was outstanding. They did not deserve to be treated that way by the pharmacy owners.

Our regulatory framework was largely developed when pharmacies were mainly independently owned businesses operating one or maybe two pharmacies, and it has not kept pace with the growth of large corporate operators controlling extensive networks. Local integrated care boards, local authorities and national bodies need powers to intervene quickly, protect patients and staff, secure medicines and ensure continuity of service.

When Jhoots’s services collapsed, I raised the issue through an urgent question in the House, and there was clear cross-party support for legislative action to ensure that that kind of crisis cannot happen again. I would like to take the opportunity to pay tribute to the hon. Member for North Somerset (Sadik Al-Hassan), who campaigned tirelessly alongside me. His help and advice were invaluable during that period, so I am extremely grateful to him.

We need to strengthen the powers available to intervene when a provider fails to meet contractual patient safety or workforce obligations. We need mechanisms to allow alternative providers to step in quickly. We must hold the corporate bodies—not the pharmacies—accountable, and where necessary take away their rights to control an essential service. We need to protect pharmacy staff when a provider collapses. Protecting the workforce is inseparable from protecting patient safety.

I say politely to the Minister that when I met her predecessor, he asked for those powers so that he could step in during the Jhoots scandal. We tried to introduce them through amendments to the Health Bill, but they were not accepted. Will the Minister please meet me and other experts, such as the hon. Member for North Somerset, as her predecessor did? Let us get her the powers to prevent this from ever happening again.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dame Diana Johnson]

I absolutely agree.

I was going to say a few words about Pharmacy First, the importance of which has been recognised this afternoon. Recent data shows growing public awareness of the service, with the proportion of people who know that pharmacies can treat Pharmacy First conditions increasing from 71% to 79%. There is more we can do, however, so I acknowledge the point made by right hon. and hon. Members.

Pharmacy First has also demonstrated what pharmacists can achieve when empowered to deliver more care. The introduction of NHS pharmacist prescribing will take that a significant step further. Evidence from the independent prescribing pathfinder programme is really encouraging. Across 200 sites, pharmacists delivered more than 34,000 consultations. Around 60% resulted in a prescribing decision, and 97% were completed without a referral to a GP. That demonstrates the real-world potential of pharmacist prescribing to improve access to care and relieve pressures.

The ’26-27 community pharmacy contractual framework builds on these lessons, as NHS pharmacist prescribing is rolled out nationally from autumn this year. That delivers on our pledges in the 10-year plan. We want to unlock the full potential of community pharmacy. It is not just about pharmacists; we are also enabling pharmacy technicians to take greater responsibility within dispensing processes, including allowing checked and bagged medicines to be handed out when the pharmacist is not present.

[Edward Morello]

I thank the Minister for being willing to meet me and the hon. Member for North Somerset (Sadik Al-Hassan) to discuss some of the issues raised today. She mentioned that officials are looking at whether legislation is necessary; will she ask them to consider whether the amendments I tabled to the Health Bill would deliver the powers she needs? If so, will the Government support them in the Lords?

[Dame Diana Johnson]

I am very happy to have a look at the amendments tabled by the hon. Gentleman and to meet him and my hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset. I cannot promise anything else, but I am happy to have a look.

Community pharmacists are a vital part of the NHS and of the communities they serve. They already dispense hundreds of millions of prescriptions every year, but their role is growing: preventing illness, treating common conditions, prescribing where appropriate and improving access to care. Our investment, reforms and 10-year health plan all point in the same direction—a stronger, sustainable community pharmacy sector. This Government are committed to working with the sector to deliver that vision.

Health Bill

Edward Morello Excerpts

Report stage & 3rd reading
Tuesday 8th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

Yesterday, I highlighted our concerns about the implications of quick-fix, top-down reorganisation for the sovereignty of the NHS and the interests of patients. In a system that already spends too much time and money reacting to failure, rather than planning for success, patient safety is already under threat. Rather than addressing those failings, this Bill is at risk of making a bonfire of patient safety. Our amendments would reverse the gutting of safety mechanisms from the NHS, all of which have been painstakingly introduced after far too many scandals.

Amendments 8 and 9 would restore Healthwatch England and local Healthwatch organisations, while new clause 14 would restore Healthwatch funding after 10 years of cuts to its service. Given that Healthwatch was originally established as a response to the devastating Mid Staffordshire scandal, its abolition would be a step backwards, showing that lessons have not been learned. An independent patient voice is essential to shape local services and highlight where they are not working well, and folding it into existing NHS structures risks destroying the trust that exists precisely because of its independence.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Helen Morgan]

I am not going to give way, because there are many colleagues who wish to speak and there is very limited time. I hope my hon. Friend will forgive me.

Another vital body for safeguarding and investigating patient safety is the Health Services Safety Investigations Body, which again functions well because of the trust NHS professionals have in its independence and objectivity. Both would be lost under the proposal to roll it into the CQC. Our amendment 12 would ensure that HSSIB’s functions remain operationally independent of the CQC, so that the NHS is not left to mark its own homework. Together, these amendments are designed so that patients are protected from another Mid Staffordshire, another Shrewsbury and Telford, another Nottingham, another East Kent or another Morecambe Bay. Rash decision making must not be allowed to put patients at risk.

Health Bill

Edward Morello Excerpts

Report stage
Monday 7th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dr Opher]

I thank the hon. Member for that comment. He is right. NHS and GP data is a massive resource for our scientists in this country, and I agree with him that it should be owned by the UK. It should be a sovereign wealth issue. I would like to ensure that we realise that over time.

I will return to over-medicalisation. I would like to try to divert patients with mild to moderate mental health symptoms to social prescribing, such as access to nature, arts and culture and exercise—and indeed comedy. Let us try to reduce that figure of 9 million on antidepressants, so that people do not have to come back for review. There would be fewer harms, such as suicide, in the first couple of weeks. Let us also look again at neurodivergence, and try to look for a way of not medicalising so many children with the condition.

If we are serious about reducing waiting lists and making the NHS sustainable for the future, we cannot focus only on supply; we must address rising demand, too. Giving people the knowledge and confidence to look after their own health will empower them, free up clinicians to care for those who need them most, and ultimately build a healthier population. That is what new clause 69 seeks to achieve. I urge the Government to accept it.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

Only half the children in my constituency have seen a dentist in two years. There has been a 20% decrease in NHS dental practices, and some constituents have written to me recently to say that they have been quoted in excess of £7,000 for the most basic of treatments. Amendment 47 would require the Government to establish training hubs in Dorset. It would ensure that dental hubs trained dentists for the future, and would mandate final-year trainees to provide supervised treatment to NHS patients straightaway. Trainees are already providing treatment for free, paid for by the taxpayer, as part of their training. Those appointments should be for the NHS, and not for private patients.

Amendment 48 would ensure that the dental funding underspend is redirected towards additional NHS appointments, shorter waiting times, outreach, and home and school-based services. Amendment 49 would require the dental funding formula to account for rurality, an ageing population, disability, transport costs and recruitment difficulties.

Community Pharmacies

Edward Morello Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Rachel Gilmour]

I agree that a strategic approach is always best. The distances, the limited public transport and the dispersed nature of rural populations mean that the closure of a single pharmacy can represent a genuine healthcare crisis for thousands of people. I see that directly in my constituency; the loss of a fully fledged pharmacy with all its associated services in Bishops Lydeard in March 2024 was a blow to the community. In its place there is now a dispensary, but solely for patients of the surgery. The same thing happened in Norton Fitzwarren. Transport woes, which so often hold back my constituents, sever a vital link to the health service.

Jhoots, the previous provider of pharmacy services in parts of Tiverton and Minehead, had operated poorly for some time. Constituents lamented the missing medicines, unexpected closures and queues stretching down the street. Under the new stewardship of Allied Pharmacies, things have improved markedly. That is a testament to what good management and proper investment can achieve.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

My hon. Friend raises the spectre of Jhoots, which resulted in the closure of the Bridport and Lyme Regis pharmacies in my constituency. Jhoots exposed serious concerns around contractual failures, unsafe practices, staff treatment and service continuity, leaving staff in my constituency relying on food banks. When I met the Minister, he told me that officials were reviewing whether additional regulatory powers were required to prevent another Jhoots scandal. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is important for the Government to bring forward legislation to deal with such a scenario?

[Rachel Gilmour]

I have had that discussion with the Minister, who reassured me that the Jhoots scenario has been at the front of his mind and he will seek to resolve it.

There is also the question of business rates. It seems manifestly unfair that community pharmacies, which are frontline NHS providers in every meaningful sense, are required to pay full business rates, while GP surgeries and dental practices do not face the same burden. I ask the Minister how that disparity can be justified and whether the Government intend to address that.

Pharmacies are the engine of community care and offer an opportunity that the Government have not fully grasped. The thrust of the Government’s health strategy has been care in the community, devolving healthcare back to local settings, with neighbourhood health structures and a shift away from hospitals to primary and preventive care. All of that is absolutely right but cannot be delivered without the community pharmacy network. Pharmacies are already doing the work the Government say they want the NHS to do: local, preventive, accessible care, delivered by trusted professionals in the heart of communities. The funding must match the words.

Disability Equipment Provision

Edward Morello Excerpts

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the provision of disability equipment.

I am grateful to the Speaker’s Office, which oversees the ballot that leads to the selection of debate topics. I am truly very pleased to have secured this debate to provide us all with the opportunity to shine a light on the issues that many people across the country are facing in accessing disability equipment.

I particularly welcome Milana Hadji-Touma, who is representing herself and a number of others today; I thank her for attending. I also thank the 653 people who have shared their experiences and provided moving testimonials, which have been invaluable in my preparation for this debate. I appreciate the time and energy that has gone into each response, and I reiterate my thanks and appreciation for all those who contributed.

I want to begin by offering some quotes from the responses, including some from my constituents:

“My daughter had to wait two years for her wheelchair.”

“I wouldn’t be able to function without my stairlift, my powered wheelchair and my crutches.”

“It is about my safety, my dignity and my ability to live independently.”

“I use a shower chair and a toilet frame which might seem small items but they have transformed my day to day safety and confidence.”

“With the correct equipment, I was able to complete a master's degree at a top university, become a teacher, learn to drive, hand cycle across eleven countries and live a full and rich life.”

Around 25% of the UK population are disabled, so access to disability equipment is essential. It alleviates everyday struggles and allows thousands of people to live safe and independent lives, which boosts personal confidence and mental wellbeing. Whether it is wheelchairs, living aids or home-adaptation items like grab rails, the devices offer numerous and powerful benefits, transforming lives so that the activities of daily life become more manageable, both for those dealing with disabling conditions and for those who provide care, including family members, friends and care workers.

Those benefits were echoed throughout my survey. One respondent stated:

“My disability equipment is my entire life”,

while another reported:

“It simplifies tasks, turns impossible activities into manageable ones with the right support, eases physical pain, reduces moments of embarrassment or vulnerability, and—most importantly—fosters greater independence and less dependence on others.”

Despite the benefits, 64% of respondents revealed that waiting times for disability equipment were longer than expected. As I said, one person reported that their daughter waited for a wheelchair for nearly two years, while one of my constituents highlighted the issues that arise from delayed equipment provision, stating:

“Without proper assessment and provision, disabled people can be left living in environments that actively worsen their health or place them at risk of injury.”

The testimonies I have shared show that there is a growing belief that the system to provide disability equipment is becoming increasingly unsustainable. With complaints about waiting times, quality of equipment and poor communication around access, it is no surprise that over 650 people responded to my survey in the space of four days. In addition, hundreds more people gave testimonies to inform the latest report from the all-party parliamentary group for access to disability equipment, published last October. Among stories of frustration and disappointment, the report revealed that 63% of carers and 55% of equipment users felt that services were getting worse.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for securing this important debate. I agree with absolutely everything he has said. He talks about the problem with access to equipment; I know of one case, which is representative of many that come across my desk, that concerns the inability to hand back equipment after use. A constituent contacted me whose mother had died after two years of home care. She had a hospital bed, three commodes, an orthopaedic chair and a walking frame. The NHS provider had gone into receivership and there was no method whatsoever for her to hand back the equipment. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we are compounding the problems for people getting equipment by not reusing the stuff that is already out there?

[Seamus Logan]

I do agree. Indeed, that problem causes a massive cost to the taxpayer as well.

It is no surprise that 74% of equipment providers were aware of patients experiencing delayed hospital discharge due to unavailable community equipment. The APPG’s report recommended and called for the implementation of a national strategy to ensure the cohesive and comprehensive delivery, monitoring and financing of disability equipment.

Complaints about the current system and provision of equipment have been reported by various other organisations, including the UK charity for young wheelchair users, Whizz Kidz, which described wheelchair services as “underfunded, inaccessible, and fractured.” In June 2025, it was reported that Citizens Advice receives a new complaint about faulty aids every hour.

My own pedigree in this area goes back many years—in fact, to 1996, when I first joined a health and personal social services commissioning organisation, under the leadership of my great friends Mary Wilmont and Kevin Keenan, both former directors of social services in Northern Ireland. We examined in great detail the wheelchair services for people who were deaf or blind, hard of hearing or visually impaired. One report stands out in my memory—not because I authored it, but because it was a simple idea to address the challenges facing people in getting to a hospital appointment. We called it “Getting There”. That was 30 years ago.

Although this Government need to “get there”, the challenges in the existing system are more profound. In England and Wales, the provision of equipment is currently run by the NHS and local authorities, which are primarily responsible for facilitating care needs assessments and subsequently approving and providing equipment. As a result, available equipment, the length of waiting times and the quality of adaptations are increasingly becoming a postcode lottery.

Rural GPs: Funding

Edward Morello Excerpts

Wednesday 11th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Esther McVey]

I thank my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour for raising that point. She is absolutely right that the number of new homes that are going to be built in rural areas, putting more pressure on GP surgeries, is significant. Without new GP practices, I am not sure where our residents will go when they need a doctor and need to see somebody about their health.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

In a similar vein to the previous intervention, one in five GP buildings predate the NHS itself, which is a quite staggering fact, and over a third of GPs say their premises are no longer fit for purpose. In places such as West Dorset, outdated buildings struggle to deal with the current population, let alone the projected future growth as a result of house building, and fewer than a third of practices that applied for capital funding last year were granted funds. Does the right hon. Member agree that GP estate funding must also be expanded to help rural areas deal with the increased population?

[Esther McVey]

I agree with the hon. Member. I will come on to my surgeries that are indeed in Victorian buildings—spread across four—and need to be brought together and modernised. That is in Knutsford in my constituency. I know that there will be many other places like that across the country. The hon. Member raises a valid and pertinent point.

We know that GP services in rural communities are spread across a large geographical area, and many elderly residents in Tatton live alone. Although such independence is cherished, travelling long distances to access healthcare is more difficult. Public transport is often limited or non-existent. Community transport schemes exist in Tatton, but they cannot always accommodate short-notice or urgent medical needs. Often, elderly residents do not drive, so they are left reliant on costly taxis or GP staff taking the time to travel to a patient’s home. That places additional pressures on already stretched services. In Lostock Gralam, despite a population of about 2,800 people, there is no GP practice. That forces patients to make a lengthy journey to Northwich, and without a direct bus service many are left to rely on taxis to make their appointment.

For those communities, recruiting and retaining staff becomes more difficult and more expensive. The Rural Services Network reports that 59% of hard-to-recruit GP speciality training posts are located in rural areas. There is less access to specialists and consultants, which makes their services more expensive. Community services and provision are sparser in rural areas, too. Pharmacies, which help to relieve pressure on GPs in urban areas, are not as common in rural areas. When I secured this debate, I was contacted by the Dispensing Doctors’ Association, which provides an essential role in dispensing medicines to patients who live more than 1.6 kilometres from a pharmacy. It delivers to about 10 million patients across England, but is facing increasing challenges due to its reliance on manual delivery.

In addition, while urban pharmacies move ahead with digital efficiency, rural pharmacies often struggle to keep pace because broadband coverage is often unreliable, rendering remote consultations near impossible and service delivery more difficult. The benefits of digitisation in healthcare are well understood across this House, but they rely entirely on having the right infrastructure in place. Without connectivity, rural practices are simply unable to access or benefit from Government investment in that area. There are lots of people from rural areas here, and we know how unreliable our broadband infrastructure is.

In 2022, the all-party parliamentary group on rural health and care published an inquiry into healthcare in rural areas. It concluded:

“Rurality and its infrastructure must be redefined to allow a better understanding of how it impinges on health outcomes”.

No progress has been made on achieving that. Removing the rurality measure of GPs’ funding entirely would be a step backwards in understanding how settings impact GPs’ ability to provide healthcare.

There is little transparency about who exactly will be consulted in the funding model review. In a written answer to a parliamentary question, the Government confirmed that the review

“will draw on a range of evidence and advice from experts,”

such as the Advisory Committee on Resource Allocation and the British Medical Association general practitioners committee, but there is little information beyond that. There are GPs in Tatton who are keen to contribute but, as of yet, have not been able to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Edward Morello Excerpts

Tuesday 13th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Karin Smyth]

We absolutely stand by that work, and we are working with NHS England to make sure it is mandated to do exactly that.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

4. What steps his Department is taking to ensure the accessibility of regular NHS dental check-up appointments in West Dorset constituency.

[The Minister for Care (Stephen Kinnock)]

This Government are committed to ending the gaps in teeth by filing the gaps in local provision, including in rural areas such as Dorset. We will work to introduce fundamental changes to the dental contract before the end of this Parliament, but already from April the reforms to NHS dentistry that I announced last month will mean more NHS appointments and better oral health.

[Edward Morello]

NHS dentistry in West Dorset is in crisis. We have just 15 practices offering any kind of NHS care, and only half of young people have seen a dentist in the last two years. Residents are writing to me about elderly people removing their own teeth and children in A&E with preventable tooth decay. What consideration has the Minister given to requiring supervised trainee dentists on placement at dental training schools to work exclusively on NHS waiting lists rather than taking private appointments, which would help reduce the backlog?

[Stephen Kinnock]

The hon. Gentleman will have noted that we have committed to tie-ins for future dentists going through the training programme. It costs the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds to train a dentist, and we believe it is absolutely right that a significant percentage of their time should be put into NHS dentistry.

In terms of improving access, in financial year 2023-24 there was a shocking £392 million underspend on NHS dentistry at a time when demand was going through the roof. I made clear that every penny allocated to NHS dentistry must be spent on NHS dentistry, and I am very pleased to report that we have got that underspend down to just £36 million. The decrease in the underspend is leading to an increase in NHS dentistry, but I accept that there is still a long way to go.

Terminal Illness: Mental Health Support

Edward Morello Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered mental health support for people with terminal illnesses.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy. I am here today because of my constituent Mike, who I am pleased to say is in the Gallery to watch the debate. In 2019, Mike experienced the devastating grief of losing a partner, but out of the trauma he is pushing for change and campaigning for better mental health support for those with terminal cancer. I pay tribute to Mike: he is a remarkable man. I thank him for bravely sharing his story with me, and I will try my best to do it justice today.

In 2016, Mike’s wife, Sarah, started to suffer with terrible pain in her back, and by the end of that year she was in constant agony. In early 2017, they found out that Sarah had lung cancer, which had spread to her spine, and she was given six months to live. A course of gruelling treatment followed, including major spinal reconstruction surgery and targeted therapy. In September 2019, Sarah succumbed to her illness, passing away a week before her 53rd birthday.

Sarah lived more than a year longer than doctors had initially predicted, and in that sense her treatment was a success, but that does not tell the whole story. There was a gaping hole in Sarah’s treatment: the lack of appropriate mental health support. Not having that support had a huge impact on Sarah’s quality of life, as well as her family and her family’s quality of life. Following her terminal diagnosis, as the devastating impact of cancer started to take its toll on her body, Sarah became deeply depressed and suffered with anxiety.

We know about the physical symptoms of cancer, such as nausea, crippling pain or a loss of mobility, and just how horrendous those symptoms are, but we talk less about the mental health effects, even though they are as common and sometimes the most crushing consequence of this awful illness. That was certainly the case with Sarah. A previously happy, outgoing and vibrant woman, who loved design, gardening and reading books, she became a shell of her former self—unwilling to go outside, not even to sit in the garden she had so lovingly cared for. She cried every day, sometimes all day, and could not eat, could not read a book and did not know what pleasure felt like. As Mike said to me the very first time we met, “Sarah disappeared into herself.” I cannot begin to imagine how hard that was or the toll it took on Sarah, Mike, her entire family and her friends.

Shamefully, Sarah never saw a psychologist or psychiatrist, and she never had a serious or rigorous mental health assessment. Sarah was offered counselling and cognitive behavioural therapy by Macmillan Cancer Support and local NHS services, but we all know the issues with those services. Waiting lists can be months long, and when Sarah did get therapy, it was often for just a few weeks at a time, before she was back on another waiting list.

Too often, as in this case, the kind of therapy offered is not appropriate for the needs of the patient. Sarah would leave her CBT sessions clutching leaflets that she was supposed to go away and read, even though she could not even look at a newspaper. She was once told to go and do some gardening when the debilitating effects of her cancer had already taken that big joy out of her life. What was needed was treatment by a psycho-oncologist—someone who would offer specialist psychological care for someone affected by cancer—but the one psycho-oncologist at her local hospital was badly overstretched and the appointment never came.

As Mike has so eloquently said, this is not a criticism of our dedicated NHS or care staff. They are not to blame for a health culture that has always been more interested in the physical than in the psychological. That deficiency, in reality, is unlikely to change without more scientists and funding bodies devoting time and cash to researching therapies to support the mental health of those with terminal illnesses. From my perspective, there seems to be precious little work being done in this area; I spoke to Macmillan and other charities ahead of this debate, and they said the same. That deficiency is despite the fact that 17% of cancer patients will be diagnosed with depression and anxiety, but almost half will not receive the treatment that they need—that must change.

I ask the Minister to seriously consider the policy suggestions made by Mike: more funding to map service provision across the national health service to identify good and bad practice, including an assessment of the effectiveness of current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines on mental health support for the terminally ill; more funding to recruit more psycho-oncologists to work in our palliative care system; a commitment to an immediate baseline mental health assessment for patients upon their diagnosis with a terminal illness and, if needed, a clear pathway for referral to an experience psycho-oncologist on diagnosis of terminal illness. I believe that those are practical and, I hope, achievable steps that could make a real difference to cancer patients.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for giving us an opportunity to talk about this incredibly important issue. I agree 100% with the recommendations that he is making. I also point to the important work that hospices do. A lot of hospices, such as Weldmar and Julia’s House in West Dorset, provide mental health-led hospice services to communities, yet, at the same time, are under extraordinary funding pressures. Weldmar has a £1 million deficit; Julia’s House gets just 8% of its funding from the NHS, yet it is relieving pressure on the NHS. Does the hon. Member think that, along with his recommendations, a sustainable funding model for hospices providing the kind of care that he is talking about is important?

[Mr Rand]

I am sure that there is recognition on both sides of the House of the incredibly important work that hospices do to support patients in our communities. I am sure that the hospices that the hon. Member mentioned will be grateful for the recognition of their important work. Of course we need to ensure sustainable funding. As he will be aware, this Government have already invested a significant amount in hospice care, but I appreciate the pressures that many hospices still find themselves under.

I would be grateful if the Minister would meet Mike and me to discuss Mike’s policy recommendations in more detail and to see if they could form part of the Government’s welcome review of palliative care services and the framework that has been announced. It feels particularly pressing at this juncture, as the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill progresses through Parliament. Although I support that legislation, I worry about the prospects of those with a terminal diagnosis. I am sure that the Minister will want to reflect on that in his response.

Suicide: Reducing the Stigma

Edward Morello Excerpts

Wednesday 19th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Mundell. I congratulate the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) on securing this important debate, and I pay tribute to her constituent, who is in the Gallery to support this campaign.

It is important to reflect on the progress that has been made in this country to remove some of the stigma around suicide, but more progress still has to be made. The more we discuss this issue in this House and in our constituencies, the greater the impact we can have in removing the stigma completely.

This Government inherited a mental health crisis—there are nearly 1.8 million people on NHS waiting lists for mental health treatment. At the same time, after decades of decline, suicide rates have increased since 2007. Worryingly, the suicide rate is now higher than at any time in the 21st century. In my local area of Kent, although the suicide rate has been coming down in recent years, it is still higher than the national average.

As is the case in the rest of the UK, suicide rates in Kent are significantly higher among men than among women. Across the country, 100 men die by suicide each week and men account for approximately three quarters of all suicide deaths in the UK. This trend has been consistent since the mid-1990s. While men are more likely than women to die by suicide in all age groups, that difference is most pronounced among middle-aged men—suicide is the biggest killer of men aged under 50. I welcome initiatives such as Movember, Andy’s Man Club, the Campaign Against Living Miserably and other similar schemes for the work that they do to help men. I particularly welcome the fact that today the Government published the first ever men’s health strategy, as part of which they will be working with the Premier League’s Together Against Suicide initiative. I would be grateful if the Minister could say a bit more about that, and about what will be done to remove the stigma around men’s mental health.

Suicide rates among young people are the lowest of all age groups, but over the past decade there has been a concerning 22% increase. A rise in the number of young people feeling disconnected and isolated after the pandemic lockdowns and an escalation in online bullying are reported to be contributing factors.

Another sector in which the silent tragedy of suicide is all too prevalent is the farming and agriculture industry, in which an average of three people die by suicide every week. Mental Health First Aid England reports that, between 2021 and 2023, suicide deaths among farmers increased year on year.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

The hon. Gentleman is talking about young people and farming. Those two issues overlap in rural areas such as mine. Our child and adolescent mental health services are centralised in Dorchester, so someone living in the extremities of Lyme Regis, Beaminster or the surrounding villages could be looking at a 30-mile round trip to access them. Given that our part of the country is famous for its unreliable bus network, that is pretty difficult for a lot of young people and for those living in isolated communities. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that improving access to things like CAMHS is vital if we are to protect young people in rural communities?

[Sojan Joseph]

As someone who worked in mental health services for 22 years, I absolutely agree. We need access to mental health services, and not just for young people; everyone is important. Getting help early is key to preventing suicide among young people.

The situation is worse among men working in the farming industry. The likelihood that a male farm worker will die by suicide is three times higher than the national average for men. Earlier this year, a Farm Safety Foundation report revealed that over 90% of farmers said that poor mental health is the biggest hidden problem in the industry.

What is contributing to that poor mental health and the increased risk of suicide among those working in the agricultural sector? It is driven by a combination of isolation—many work alone in remote areas—and financial pressure from market volatility, debt and rising costs. Long working hours, often exceeding 60 hours per week, lead to exhaustion and poor mental health. There is also a strong stigma around seeking help, which means that many farmers suffer in silence.

The connection between suicide and mental illness is well documented, but reducing the stigma of suicide should not be viewed solely as a mental health issue. Many individuals who die by suicide have never engaged with mental health services or displayed obvious symptoms, and not all have a diagnosed condition. People at risk often face a complex mix of personal, relational, community and societal factors. As the suicide prevention strategy highlights, common risk factors include physical illness, financial hardship, gambling, substance misuse, social isolation, loneliness and domestic abuse. Although mental health support is important, the strategy stresses that reducing stigma extends far beyond that. Focusing only on mental health risks overlooking those in acute distress who do not meet the diagnostic criteria. It also places the burden on mental health services, when in reality reducing the stigma of suicide requires a collective effort from local authorities, employers, schools, the justice system and society at large.

Jhoots Pharmacy

Edward Morello Excerpts

Wednesday 15th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care if he will make a statement on the adequacy of Jhoots as a pharmacy provider.

[The Minister for Care (Stephen Kinnock)]

I congratulate the hon. Member on securing this important urgent question.

Pharmacies play a vital role in our healthcare system. They are at the heart of our high streets and are the cornerstone of communities up and down the country. That is why this Government have given pharmacies a funding boost of almost £500 million this year, which is more than any other area of the NHS and the biggest uplift in years. Indeed, we have provided a 19% uplift over the two-year period.

The vast majority of pharmacies provide excellent care to their patients, but unfortunately there are some that fall short of the standards we expect. Sadly, the services provided by Jhoots are falling well below the mark. Hon. Members will know that several integrated care boards have been deploying contract management actions against Jhoots, initially in the form of breach notices. Integrated care boards enforce the NHS terms of service on pharmacies for such things as their opening hours, and the General Pharmaceutical Council regulates pharmacy premises and pharmacy professionals. Both ICBs and the General Pharmaceutical Council have powers to address problems in pharmacies and they are actively using those powers, including in relation to stores that are part of Jhoots.

I have written to the hon. Gentleman about this case. As he will understand, it is difficult for me to go into detail about one pharmacy chain, at least on the specifics of the measures we are taking, but I can tell him that where there are problems with access to medicines, ICBs are supporting affected patients in the short term, for example by allowing local dispensing doctors to provide dispensing services to those patients. Where pharmacy stores regularly breach their terms of service, ICBs can give them notice that they are being removed from the pharmaceutical list. This power applies to any and all pharmacies, including, of course, Jhoots, and means that pharmacies would no longer be able to provide NHS services. Such notices can be appealed against, so it does take some time to work through the system. I stress to hon. Members that pharmacies are private businesses and must be responsible business owners. We can regulate what pharmacies should and should not do as part of their NHS terms of service, but it is not possible to prevent pharmacies from, for example, not paying their staff.

In conclusion, if pharmacies breach their terms of service, for example by not being open when they should be or where there are patient safety concerns, we take action. The General Pharmaceutical Council is taking regulatory action. ICBs are taking regulatory action and are supporting patients with access to medicines where necessary. This is aimed at improving pharmacies’ behaviour, but can ultimately lead to pharmacies being forced to close their business. I have also asked my officials to explore whether we can strengthen the regulatory framework to be able to deal more quickly with pharmacies that do not play by the rules. My officials are working on that as a matter of urgency. My office is also setting up a meeting with the hon. Gentleman to discuss this matter further and I will keep the House updated in the usual way.

[Edward Morello]

I would be grateful, Madam Deputy Speaker, if you could pass on my thanks to Mr Speaker for granting this urgent question. I thank the Minister for his response.

The collapse of service provision in some places, the constant closures in others and the general governance at Jhoots pharmacy, which operates 150 branches across England, demands immediate ministerial intervention. In West Dorset, Jhoots branches in Lyme Regis and Bridport have been closed for months, leaving thousands without access to essential medication and placing a huge strain on overstretched neighbouring pharmacies. Jhoots staff have gone months without pay, despite payslips being issued, tax deductions made and pension contributions not deposited. I have been contacted only this morning by staff who have not been paid for the third month. Many are unable to buy food or pay rent. They are relying on food banks and the amazing communities that have stepped up to support them. There have been reports of staff recruited by Jhoots under skilled worker visas being left without income or resource. I have also been made aware of deeply troubling reports of controlled drugs being removed without proper documentation or process, which if proven true may constitute a breach of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.

I have raised my concerns with the General Pharmaceutical Council, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, the NHS Business Services Authority, the ICB and the Minister, whom I thank for his response. I understand that processes must be followed, but this situation requires immediate action. Jhoots staff are not being paid and people across the country do not have access to vital medicine. Will the Minister please confirm what steps are being taken to ensure that all Jhoots staff are paid without delay? What discussions have taken place with the NHS BSA, the General Pharmaceutical Council and other regulators about Jhoots’s business practices? Finally, will the Government commit to urgently reviewing Jhoots’s suitability as an NHS pharmacy provider, outline what safeguards will be introduced to prevent this from happening again and review the pharmacy funding model?

[Stephen Kinnock]

I agree with everything the hon. Gentleman has said. It is completely and utterly unacceptable if a business such as Jhoots is not paying its staff. If there are indeed these reports that controlled drugs are not being handled properly, I would strongly recommend that any mishandling of drugs be reported to the General Pharmaceutical Council, which regulates pharmacy professionals and premises, so that appropriate action can be taken.

The hon. Gentleman asked about the payment of staff. Pharmacy staff are vital parts of the NHS part of what a pharmacy does. Pharmacy staff provide vital services to our communities and should be paid according to their contracts; any failure to do so is completely unacceptable. Of course, pharmacy staff are employed not by the NHS, but by the businesses they work for, so any dispute between staff and a pharmacy business should be raised with the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service, ACAS. I am also in touch with the Pharmacists’ Defence Association—the PDA—which is doing important work representing its members. I will be meeting them soon as well. Of course, we have responsibility for the NHS part of the work, but it is up to individual businesses to ensure that their employees are treated fairly.

The hon. Gentleman rightly mentions the review of suitability to operate, and we are now looking at that across the board. We are looking at the role of the General Pharmaceutical Council and what is taking place with ICBs taking contract action. Where there is no sign of improvement and pharmacies continue to be in breach, the next escalation is to strike them off the pharmaceutical register, which takes some time, because certain pharmacies—I am not going to name names, but I am sure the hon. Gentleman can imagine who—are trying every single thing they can to appeal, push back and stop the actions that we are seeking to take, which is elongating the process. However, I want to be clear: if there is clear breach and action is not taken to remedy that breach, pharmacies will be struck off the pharmaceutical register.