Health Bill (Second sitting)

Debate between Laura Kyrke-Smith and Janet Daby

Committee stage
Tuesday 16th June 2026 Public Bill Committees

[Janet Daby (Lewisham East) (Lab)]

Q Sally, you have said a bit on this already, but could you say a bit more about how the single patient record could change and improve day-to-day experiences of the health and social care system, and the safeguards that you might be concerned about?

Sally Burlington: As I understand it, the safeguards around data sharing remain in place under the Bill—they do not change. The part of the single patient record that is really attractive to our world is that people will not have to repeat themselves to every professional they meet; they will not have to tell their story again and again or be retraumatised by explaining the detail of what they have been through.

The potential advantages are there, but there are obviously concerns about data protection and how data is used. It is incumbent on us all to take those seriously, think them through and make sure that safeguards are appropriately implemented locally and in all the institutions that have access. That is probably a matter less for the Bill and more for the implementation and supporting regulations, but we and other partners will be keen to be a part of that process to make sure that the safeguards are appropriate.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith]

Q I come from a county with really significant health inequalities—people in the wealthy parts of the county live 10 or 12 years longer than people in some of the more deprived parts of Aylesbury, which I represent. I would love to hear your thoughts on how we ensure that local authorities, ICBs and the voluntary sector continue working well together through this, and specifically how we do that in a way that drives the reduction we need in health inequalities.

Maria Higson: I think we are all agreed that working at the neighbourhood level is absolutely the right way to go about that. That is where health inequalities can best be addressed, because that can be most nuanced and tailored. Working on that smaller footprint is really important. You mentioned voluntary, community and social enterprise organisations, and I think that is a hugely important part that has broadly been missed out from the conversation around these changes. We work closely with VCSE partners and we know they deliver huge amounts for the communities and understand the communities in which they are embedded very well, so making sure that the VCSE voice is part of those neighbourhood teams will be important for that nuance and tailoring in the local element.

Councillor Wright: I agree entirely. Local authorities are in a good position to engage the voluntary and community sector. But again, we are fighting for a voice with the NHS and they are fighting for a voice with us, so we need some honest conversations with ICBs, and a real strategy looking at those health inequalities and what is driving them. It will not purely be access to hospitals; it will also be access to meaningful employment, housing, transport, mental health or social isolation—there will be so much driving those wider determinants of health that are affecting healthy life expectancy. Local authorities are in a prime position to do that, and they need to be listened to. I think the challenge will be how we collectively say, “What needs to be done, other than implementing the Bill? How do we look at the whole health inequality picture and address it?”

Sally Burlington: I would agree with the others: tackling health inequalities is really difficult. Doing it the same way in every area would not work, particularly in a world where there is not enough resource to do everything we would all like to do. You have to tailor how you approach local service delivery and what is needed locally according to local needs, the local community capability, how people work and what their preferences are locally, and the neighbourhood health agenda is our best shot at tailoring in that way.

I think you will come on to Healthwatch, but we would have concerns that, in separating the Healthwatch duties to look at NHS and social care, we risk missing some of those who are most likely to need both, and that that could exacerbate health inequalities rather than make them better.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Laura Kyrke-Smith and Janet Daby

Monday 27th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)]

20. What plans she has for the future of apprenticeships.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Janet Daby)]

The Government have a mission to break down barriers to opportunity, and we want to rebalance opportunities in favour of young people who have the most to gain from apprenticeships. Where starts have fallen by almost 40%, we are introducing foundation apprenticeships to give more young people a foot in the door at the start of their working life.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith]

We are fortunate to have some great apprenticeship providers in Aylesbury, such as the Buckinghamshire College Group and Buckinghamshire New University. When I joined pupils from the Grange school at their careers fair, I saw at first hand their excitement about the apprenticeship options on offer. We know that apprenticeships are a win-win for young people and for sectors facing recruitment challenges, such as health and social care and construction. What steps is the Minister taking to expand and strengthen apprenticeships, and to ensure that all young people who choose to go down that route are able to do so?

[Janet Daby]

My hon. Friend is a real champion for students at Buckinghamshire colleges, and indeed for young people across Aylesbury. I know the area she represents very well. After the Conservatives left us with a collapsing apprenticeship system and other skills shortages, Labour is listening to employers and redrawing the system through Skills England, a new growth and skills levy and new foundation apprenticeships. That is how we will unlock opportunity and drive growth.