(1Â week, 5Â days ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Mr Lee Dillon (Newbury) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts. I thank the hon. Member for Leicester East (Shivani Raja) for securing this important debate. I declare an interest as a vice-chair of the APPG on pharmacy, my colleague on which, the hon. Member for North Somerset (Sadik Al-Hassan), I am happy to follow.
For many residents in rural constituencies such as mine, local pharmacies are the first, and often only, point of contact with the NHS. Longer distances to travel, limited public transport and patchy digital connectivity mean that the trusted and timely in-person service that they provide for our communities is vital. However, access is thin on the ground.
Analysis by the National Pharmacy Association has described west Berkshire as England’s “pharmacy desert”, with the lowest number of pharmacies per head of any council area. To put that in context, the UK average is about one pharmacy to every 4,600 patients; in my constituency, it is one to every 7,200. Twelve pharmacies still open their doors to residents across Newbury and west Berkshire, and they do essential, extraordinary work. They dispense more than 111,000 prescriptions every month and deliver enough consultations through Pharmacy First to save more than 8,000 GP appointments, all while acting as a specialist and friendly front door to our NHS.
Like many here, I welcome the Government’s recent investment in the sector. We have heard the cash figures, but the 10.3% uplift for 2026-27 is the largest increase anywhere in primary care this year, and the move to expand prescribing rights is a vital step in the right direction. However, a positive uplift does not in isolation deliver the sustainable settlements that pharmacies desperately need. Pharmacies cannot plan their workforce or their services throughout the year when settlements are negotiated and have to be fought for year by year. Nationally, we have lost over 1,300 pharmacies since 2016, and this year’s uplift will not plug the underlying funding gap, which now stands at over £2 billion. It is no wonder that Community Pharmacy England accepted this year’s deal on the condition of further reform, stating clearly:
“Accepting this deal does not mean we think it is enough”.
With budgets stretched, that instability is compounded by broken medicine supply chains and a framework that leaves many pharmacies in the impossible position of dispensing medicines at a loss. On visits to Lambourn pharmacy and MedWell chemist in Newbury, staff told me that current funding would quickly be absorbed by rocketing drug prices, with some pharmacies paying 14 to 15 times more for prescription medicine than at the start of the year. In rural areas, where proximity to provision is already paramount, older residents in particular cannot afford to lose access to their prescription because their pharmacy down the road has been priced out of existence. Despite those challenges, pharmacies are doing incredible work, and I know how much residents across Newbury and West Berkshire value their expertise and care.
In September 2024, the Government commissioned the Lord Darzi report, which rightly acknowledged the huge potential of pharmacies within the NHS. Two years on, with a workforce eager to do all it can, that potential remains unfulfilled—not for a lack of experience and care, but because of a lack of investment from the centre. The 10-year health plan’s ambition to shift care from hospitals into communities is absolutely the right one, and pharmacies are the linchpin of that push. As their responsibilities continue to rise, so must the Government’s backing. Pharmacies have spent the last 10 years being squeezed to near breaking point; the next 10 and beyond must be different.
I therefore ask the Minister to launch a strategic review of medicine supply, including reforms needed to build domestic manufacturing capability, and to commit to an above-inflation multi-year funding settlement that allows pharmacies to continue to serve my constituents and millions of patients across the country for decades to come.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Betts. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Leicester East (Shivani Raja) on securing such an important debate.
Supporting our pharmacies is one of my long-standing commitments; I have spoken about the issue many times in the Chamber. Pharmacies are at the heart of primary care, and I am grateful for the contribution they make to our community—dispensing medicines, delivering vaccinations, offering advice for minor conditions and providing clinical services that would otherwise need to be delivered elsewhere. Pharmacies are accessible and embedded in our high streets. For millions, they are the front door to the NHS.
I have had the pleasure of speaking to pharmacists from across my South West Hertfordshire constituency, visiting Abbey pharmacy in Abbots Langley, Boots in Kings Langley and Esom pharmacy in South Oxhey, and even undertaking work experience at Riverside pharmacy in Rickmansworth. As I have said in Parliament before, my discussions have made it clear that our pharmacies are under unsustainable pressure as a result of the Labour Government’s continued attack on retail businesses.
I welcome the commitment in the Government’s 10-year health plan to move more healthcare responsibilities from hospitals into our communities, but that is not feasible unless pharmacies receive the necessary financial support. It is important to note that community pharmacies have not been exempted from any of the Government’s harmful economic policies against retail businesses. Since the Government’s announcements at the autumn 2024 Budget, their employer national insurance contributions and national living wage have increased, and their rate of business rates relief has reduced. Pharmacies now face significantly higher operating costs.
Mr Dillon
Lambourn pharmacy, which I mentioned earlier, worked out that about 90% of its profit came from serving the NHS and only 10% came from shampoo and other things, so it wonders whether the Government could pro rata those NI and other costs, meaning that they are paid only on the 10%. Would the hon. Gentleman welcome that type of approach?
I am very conscious that I have a former Chancellor and Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), sitting to my left; he might argue for keeping it simple. I would argue that a pharmacy’s primary business is healthcare related, and that either we support our healthcare system or we do not. Doing it piecemeal is not in the best interests of what some of my residents regard as the frontline of the NHS system.
In the past 12 months alone, more than 600 neighbourhood pharmacies have closed. That looks set to worsen, because business rates relief for retail businesses has been removed for this financial year—a significant shift from the 75% business rates relief afforded to retail businesses in 2024 under the previous Conservative Government. Although GP practices can have their business rates reimbursed by the NHS, and NHS dental practices can also qualify for reimbursement, community pharmacies receive no equivalent compensation, despite providing NHS services every day, as has been mentioned. How is this fair or reasonable at a time when the Government are shifting more responsibility to the sector?
I have also been in contact with Community Pharmacy Hertfordshire. Although the 2026-27 community pharmacy contract provides additional investment in community pharmacies, it still falls short of what is needed to put the framework on a sustainable financial footing. Research conducted by the Independent Pharmacies Association, which has done a brilliant campaign on this matter, shows that an average pharmacy dispensing 10,000 items a month still faces a shortfall of £56,000 against what would be needed to keep pace with inflation—a very stretched financial situation.
When I met with the previous Minister for Care, the right hon. Member for Aberafan Maesteg (Stephen Kinnock), earlier this year, I was disappointed that he could not outline clear steps as to how that situation could be alleviated. Without a sustainable, longer-term funding settlement, more pharmacies risk closing at the same time as the NHS is asking the sector to do more.
It is also disappointing that the Government have delayed Pharmacy First payments. Under the previous Conservative Government, the Pharmacy First initiative was introduced to allow community pharmacies to support patients with common conditions, reducing the pressure faced by our GPs. Now, many pharmacies I speak to have said they are struggling to deliver this service as a result of the Government’s withholding of funding. The impact of pharmacies in delivering primary care should not be underestimated. Shifting more flu vaccinations into pharmacies could free up around 4.5 million GP appointments each year.
In conclusion, pharmacies are accessible and already have the infrastructure and clinical expertise to provide more care closer to home. However, patients will benefit from an expanded role for community pharmacies if their pharmacy stays open. Currently, with unsustainable operating costs and limited Government funding, that has become increasingly difficult. Without the financial support to deliver these services, many pharmacies risk closing. If the Government want to shift care from hospitals into communities, the funding must follow.
(1Â year, 3Â months ago)
Commons Chamber
Mr Lee Dillon (Newbury) (LD)
I hear the argument from hon. Members on both sides of the Chamber about palliative care in this country not being at the level that we would expect, and I accept that. What I do not hear from those who oppose the Bill is exactly what level we need so that assisted dying can go hand in hand with it as a genuine option.
I note that the Health and Social Care Committee and the hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) have undertaken a report, so they will advise us on that issue. [Interruption.] I am aware that I need to finish, so I urge hon. Members to support the amendments of my hon. Friends the Members for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler) and for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) to ensure that we do not allow the Bill to implement sweeping Henry VIII powers on such a sensitive and important issue, and to ensure that we collect, through new schedule 2, important monitoring data on how any assisted dying or death service will operate. We need transparency.
(1Â year, 8Â months ago)
Commons ChamberI reassure my hon. Friend that the approach we are taking, particularly the steps in the coming weeks on the outline for key delivery and the appointment of a partner, give me the confidence and assurance to know that the timetable we have set out is affordable and credible. I am always happy to receive advice and representations from my hon. Friend, who knows a huge amount about what she speaks about.
Mr Lee Dillon (Newbury) (LD)
In a few weeks’ time, I will celebrate my 42nd birthday. I was born at the Royal Berkshire hospital in Newbury, and given the Secretary of State’s announcement today, I will be celebrating my 60th birthday when the new hospital is due to open. Will the Secretary of State talk us through how operational budgets will be increased at hospitals such as the Royal Berkshire, which currently has a backlog of repairs of over £200 million that could stop operations and procedures happening? How will the Government ensure that money is in place while we wait 14 years for our new hospital?
I will be getting to 42 slightly earlier than the hon. Gentleman, as it is my 42nd birthday is tomorrow—I look forward to the cards in the post.
More seriously, on the phasing of the programme, we have taken an approach that ensures that we can stand up and look his constituents and others in the eye, and say that we have an affordable programme that can be delivered according to the timetable that is set out. I know people will be disappointed by the length of time it will take and I am genuinely sorry that they were led up the garden path by our predecessors. That is why we have taken an approach that says that honesty is the best policy. We would rather be up front about the length of time and in the meantime ensure we are delivering the investment and reform needed to reduce waiting times and improve primary, community and social care services, so even as work continues to prepare for the Royal Berkshire hospital scheme, his constituents and others across Berkshire will begin to experience an improving NHS under Labour, as opposed to the broken one they experienced under the Conservatives.
(1Â year, 8Â months ago)
Commons Chamber
Mr Lee Dillon (Newbury) (LD)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) on securing this debate. I thank him for raising interesting aspects of which I was not aware, such as the 13 cancers. I also thank the right hon. Member for Wetherby and Easingwold (Sir Alec Shelbrooke) for sharing his personal journey with us in this Chamber. It was a worthwhile contribution to this debate.
In 2023, nearly 32% of children in year 6 in West Berkshire were classified as overweight, an increase of 3% on the year before. This is not an isolated trend: obesity rates among children and adults are rising across the country. The doubling of obesity rates in the UK over the past 30 years has been driven by multiple factors, of which changes in diet are one of the most significant.
In that time, the UK’s food environment has also undergone a dramatic shift. Today, 25% of all food outlets are fast food establishments offering meals that are higher in sugar and fat but more affordable than healthy alternatives. Their affordability makes them increasingly attractive, particularly to those who are under financial pressure. With the rising cost of living, especially with energy bills, many households are left with less disposable income, and food budgets are one of the first areas in which people try to cut costs. Over the past three years, the price of healthy food has increased by £1.76 per 1,000 kilocalories, compared with just 76p for less healthy options.
The impact of these changing diets is having severe consequences on people’s health and is placing immense pressure on the NHS. Obesity increases the risk of developing various diseases, including certain cancers such as colon cancer. It raises by more than two and a half times the likelihood of high blood pressure, which greatly increases the risk of heart disease. According to Frontier Economics, obesity costs the NHS £35 billion every year. That is simply unacceptable. The UK should be among the healthiest countries in the world. We have a rich tradition of grassroots sports, high-quality food production and world-leading medical research, yet our statistics tell a different story.
The UK currently has the third highest rate of overweight or obese individuals in Europe. The Government must take decisive action to address this growing crisis. The Liberal Democrats have called for a reversal of the Conservatives’ cuts to the public health grants that enable local authorities to deliver the essential preventive services and community programmes that combat obesity and promote healthier diets. We also urge the Government to expand the national food strategy, not only to address food security, but to tackle rising food prices, end food poverty and improve public health and nutrition.
It is vital that we halt this alarming trend of rising obesity. People deserve the opportunity to live healthier, longer lives. Reducing obesity will also have a transformative impact on the NHS, easing the immense pressure that it is facing. I implore the Government to take bold action and urgent steps to ensure that healthier food options are more accessible and to foster a culture of healthy activity across our nation.
(1Â year, 9Â months ago)
Commons Chamber
Mr Lee Dillon (Newbury) (LD)
I was a smoker for 15 years, I have vaped for 12 years and I have three children under 12, who I hope will follow neither habit. I support the ambition to create a smokefree society. The harm to individuals is clear, as smoking causes 80,000 deaths per year, and the cost to the country is just as clear, with smoking costing the economy nearly ÂŁ22 billion a year.
However, I have concerns about the ability of retailers to enforce the age escalator proposals. Will the Minister look at increasing the age at which people can buy tobacco by a year every year, rather than linking it to when a child is born? That would mean that people of the same age would have the same right, rather than two people being 37, for example, and one not being able to purchase tobacco because of exactly when they were born during the year.
My biggest concern about the Bill is the inclusion of vapes, alongside tobacco. Vaping is the fastest growing smoking-cessation method, and evidence has found that it is twice as effective as other tools used to stop smoking. I took part in the statutory instrument debate on 13 November and I support the ban on disposable vapes that that regulation enacted. The regulation will reduce the number of children vaping, the amount of dangerous fake vapes and the impact on the environment.
However, the Bill could go too far on vaping. The all-party parliamentary group on responsible vaping has provided a useful briefing. I believe the House will pass the Bill’s Second Reading later today, so I ask hon. Members to look at the briefing before we get to Committee. Part 5, clause 92 of the Bill has the ability to undo the Government’s ambition of a smokefree country, by potentially banning flavours under a future statutory instrument. A study of more than 20,000 vapers showed that those who start with flavoured vapes or move from tobacco to flavoured vapes are more likely to quit smoking.
That was my experience too. I first purchased a refillable vape in France, which came with a tobacco flavour and a cherry flavour. I went back to the gîte with my friends where we were on holiday. I knew what tobacco tasted like—I had my cigarettes in my pocket—so I tried the cherry flavour and enjoyed it so much that I never opened the tobacco-flavoured vape pot. I took the cigarettes I had in my pocket back home to England. They were on my bedside table for six months, after which I screwed the packet up and threw it away. I have not had a cigarette since.
I honestly feel that the provisions in the Bill for Ministers to be able to ban flavours for adults goes too far. For the record, I vape something called blueberry sour raspberry. It is not aimed at children—I buy it from a specialist vape shop where customers have to be over 18. I have the bottle in my pocket and it has no bright colours or fancy graphics on it. That is my preference as an adult to vape and it stops me wanting to pick up a cigarette again. If the Bill passes its Second Reading this evening, clause 92 should require that vape flavours are regulated with a balance between the impact on adults who would otherwise be smoking and the potential for youth uptake. Hon. Members should remember that disposable vapes have already been banned by the statutory instrument passed a couple of weeks ago.
Finally, before Ministers use the affirmative resolution procedure on any of the Bill’s parts or clauses, I urge them to undertake a comprehensive, evidence-based approach to vaping regulations. I will not vote against the Bill at this stage, but I hope the Government are open to practical amendments in Committee that support the ambition to have a smokefree generation without penalising those who already rely on vapes to lead a healthier lifestyle.
We have three remaining contributions from Back-Bench Members. This is fair notice for colleagues who have contributed to the debate to make their way to the Chamber for wind ups. I call Kirith Entwistle.
(1Â year, 10Â months ago)
Commons ChamberI am grateful to my hon. Friend for the question and pay tribute to the work being done by Guy’s and St Thomas’. He is right to raise cyber-security. That is why the capital investment announced by the Chancellor is welcome and necessary, and joint working across Government, including with security colleagues and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, is vital to keep patients’ data and information safe and to keep critical systems running.
Mr Lee Dillon (Newbury) (LD)
When the Secretary of State reviews GP funding, will he also consider the burden that sits on GP practices when they have to hold the lease for their surgeries and what role integrated care boards could have in holding that risk, which is stopping the recruitment of GPs to join practices as partners?
NHS England currently accepts ICBs holding leases only as a last resort or by exception due to the significant capital required. While we know that is not the most effective use of ICB resources, it is an important safeguard. We are committed to fixing the front door of the NHS by supporting GPs and ICBs through, for example, the ÂŁ100 million of capital funding announced at the Budget for GP estate upgrades.
(1Â year, 10Â months ago)
Commons ChamberI assure the hon. Gentleman that since we were elected, the Government have already taken action to secure extra investment in the health and social care system, and we are committed to building a thriving health and social care system for the rest of the 21st century.
Mr Lee Dillon (Newbury) (LD)
A rural pharmacy—one of the few remaining in my constituency—derives 90% of its turnover from providing NHS services. Will the Minister consider giving pharmacists for whom NHS services account for such a large proportion of their work an exemption from the NICs rises? What assessment have the Government made of the impact on the continuing delivery of programmes such as Pharmacy First if pharmacists have to shut their doors?
The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point about pharmacies. We absolutely understand their importance, both in urban constituencies such as mine and in rural areas. I remember from when I became an MP in 2015 the changes that the previous Government made to the pharmacy contract, and I am aware of the precarious situation that pharmacists have been in. We will continue to talk to them as part of the normal process, but we understand how important they are to building a neighbourhood service and to the future of the NHS.
(1Â year, 11Â months ago)
Commons Chamber
Mr Lee Dillon (Newbury) (LD)
Thank you for calling me in this important debate, Madam Deputy Speaker.
In west Berkshire last year, we experienced a 31% increase in four-week waits for GP appointments compared to 2022, indicating that more patients are struggling to access medical care. That is compounded by us having the lowest pharmacy provision in the country, with 7,200 patients per pharmacy compared to the national average of 4,600.
Last week, I met constituents to hear about their experiences of healthcare services. One shared their frustration at seeing a GP only to be told that their issue fell under the remit of a pharmacist. Then the pharmacist told them that it fell under the remit of the GP. That is, unfortunately, not a unique experience, with 24.2% of people reporting a poor experience with GPs. That is why services such as Healthwatch West Berkshire are so important.
The current governance model for partner GP surgeries also needs to be addressed to help maintain their very existence, in particular by de-risking leases in strategically important estates. I hope the Government will look at the general practice premises policy review of 2019 and implement its findings to ensure that leases are assigned to NHS bodies. That will help with the retention of more GPs, which will in turn improve health outcomes for patients.
The public were sick and tired of our failing NHS. That is why, in July this year, they prescribed the Conservatives with a much-needed period of opposition— hopefully a repeat prescription. I hope we can now start a treatment plan to get our NHS back to full health.