(2 weeks, 3 days ago)
Commons Chamber
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
Last week’s Budget marked a clear turn away from the damage and austerity of the previous Government towards a fairer, stronger country that will deliver on the public’s priorities. People in my constituency have already expressed their appreciation at having a Labour Budget built from Labour values to overturn 15 years of cuts and chaos.
As an OnSide youth champion and a frequent visitor to the Way Youth Zone, as well as schools, the City of Wolverhampton college, the University of Wolverhampton, Juniper Training and the Wolves Foundation in my constituency, I welcome the increased support for young people. Lifting the two-child benefit cap, paid for by a tax on gambling companies, will lift 450,000 children out of poverty, including more than 3,000 children in Wolverhampton West, and expanding free breakfast clubs, including at Penn Fields school in my constituency, as well as free school meals, will mean that children do not go to school hungry. This is what the NHS wants—to remove child poverty—and it will also help the rest of society, and if these children can learn and then earn when older, they will go on to contribute to our economy. Looking after our children therefore also makes economic sense. A child growing up in poverty is less likely to work as an adult, and earns 25% less aged 30.
The youth guarantee means that every young person who has been on universal credit for 18 months without earning or learning will be offered a guaranteed paid work placement, with the Government investing an additional £725 million to help support apprenticeships, enabling small and medium-sized businesses to offer apprenticeships to our young people at no cost to them.
Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)
Last week, I went to Shipley college in my constituency and met some of the students. They asked what the Labour Government were going to do to provide them with training and employment opportunities. Does my hon. Friend agree that giving free training to SMEs to take on apprentices will help to deliver better opportunities for our young people?
Warinder Juss
I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. Not only is that very good for our young people—they will have apprenticeships—but for our SMEs, as they will be able to offer those apprenticeships without the cost.
Raising the minimum wage and the living wage will also help to increase the spending power of young people to contribute to the local economy.
The Government are tackling the cost of living crisis by freezing prescription charges and rail fares for the first time in 30 years, and by bringing down energy bills by £150. In Wolverhampton West, I am proud that many of our hard-working businesses will benefit by having new permanently lower business rates. That will benefit so many retail, hospitality and leisure businesses throughout Wolverhampton, fulfilling our manifesto promise and paid for by the increase in business rates for the warehouses of giant online companies. That will boost our high streets and strengthen our local economy.
I am very pleased that the Chancellor recognised the importance of horseracing—my constituency has the famous Wolverhampton racecourse—with the new exemption to the planned rises in gambling tax.
To ensure that those with the broadest shoulders pay their fair share, I welcome the additional revenue from the high value council tax surcharge on homes worth over £2 million. This will reinforce our vital public services.
Pensioners who may have felt left behind in the past will be pleased to know about the triple lock pension rise of 4.8%.
The Budget shows that the Government are listening to the people and that they have made decisions based on the needs of the constituents we represent. This is a Labour Budget rooted in Labour values, and marks a significant shift towards a fairer and more equitable country. I am proud that the Chancellor and the Government have placed our children, our young people, working people, the NHS, the cost of living and the economy at the heart of every decision in the Budget. We are investing in our people, in our public services and in the country we are all so proud to call home.
(4 weeks, 1 day ago)
Commons Chamber
David Burton-Sampson (Southend West and Leigh) (Lab)
Madam Deputy Speaker, you may or may not have noticed the unusual growth appearing between my nose and top lip. Yes, it is Movember, and for the first time I have had the opportunity to prove to everyone that I can grow facial hair—if that is what you can call it. My Mo is becoming the subject of much contention, with many suggesting that this premiere of what I now affectionately call Bob should remain after 30 November, while I am gaining a growing respect for those whose sensible opinion is that Bob needs the chop—and that is exactly what will happen.
Movember is one of many great organisations focusing on men’s health, including improving men’s mental health. I am growing this Mo to highlight a plight that many of us will have been touched by: not just poor mental health but male suicide. As I have said in this place before, I have been personally impacted by male suicide, having lost a good friend a year ago last week. A year on, I know that for me and all those who were part of his life the initial shock may have gone but the sense of loss and pain still lingers, as do the endless questions of “What if?”—for no one more so than my friend’s husband. We often forget that suicide has a profound effect on those left behind, especially partners. Suicide survivors, as they are known, will often go on to develop depression or post-traumatic stress disorder and need psychiatric care. Most worryingly, people bereaved by suicide are 65% more likely to take their own life than somebody bereaved by a natural loss.
The story of my friend is sadly a story that is repeated time and again. The stats around male suicide are simply shocking. Three in every four suicides are male, and it is the leading cause of death among young men aged 20 to 34, with the highest rates of suicide among men aged 40 to 54. Many of these men have been in contact with either their GP or other primary care services prior to their death, but men account for only 33% of referrals to NHS talking therapy, which does not match with the fact that 75% of deaths by suicide are men.
What is leading to this? It is often thought that men just do not talk about their feelings, similarly to how they ignore signs of ill health, and that much of this is because of cultural norms around masculinity that cannot be broken for fear of appearing weak—but is that really the case? As I have just said, many men will reach out to primary care; an estimated 43% of men aged 40 to 54 who die by suicide saw their GP in the three months before their death. What men often do not do is talk about their feelings in environments where they are likely to get more peer support from their community. Some amazing work is being done in this space by organisations such as Movember, Men’s Shed and Andy’s Man Club.
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
My hon. Friend is making an excellent contribution. On men not expressing their feelings, I had a constituent at my last surgery who told me about the domestic abuse he had suffered. As a man, he felt that he could not express that because of the idea that men do not get beaten up by women. Does my hon. Friend agree that domestic abuse is an evil and that, although it largely affects women, men can also be affected?
David Burton-Sampson
I agree with everything that my hon. Friend just said. Domestic abuse is abhorrent, and although it does mainly affect women, we cannot deny that it also affects men. We need to look into and address it.
I was delighted to see the first ever men’s health strategy launched yesterday, starting to address head on the issues that I have raised, with £3.6 million invested in suicide prevention projects for middle-aged men as well as expanding mental health teams in schools and a partnership with the Premier League’s “Together Against Suicide” initiative with the brilliant Samaritans.
Moving forward, we absolutely need to keep the focus on supporting men’s health, and especially their mental health. We want to see more men’s spaces continue to evolve to be more supportive of men’s emotional needs. I will continue to work hard through the all-party parliamentary group on male suicide to drive and promote better mental health for men. We must see suicide rates come down before we lose too many more of our sons, brothers, fathers and partners.
To finish, in the spirit of the Dad Shift request for as many dad jokes as possible, here is mine. Why did the maths book look so sad? Because it had too many problems. On that note, if you feel that you have too many problems, do not hold them in—get talking.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI am grateful for the opportunity to lead this debate on a subject that, to the best of my knowledge, has never been discussed on the Floor of the House before.
I often speak of my 25 years as an NHS nurse because that experience has fundamentally shaped my understanding of the hidden struggles within our communities, and it is from that perspective that I raise the urgent and often misunderstood issue of hoarding disorder. Many years ago, as a district nurse serving the Kingstanding community—the same community that I am now proud to represent in Parliament—I entered homes where extreme clutter was not an anomaly but a visible sign of a deep, unaddressed need. Today, we have a name for it. In 2018, hoarding disorder was formally recognised in Britain as a distinct mental health condition. It is defined by persistent difficulty in discarding or parting with possessions, regardless of value, leading to cluttered living spaces and significant distress or impairment in daily life.
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
My hon. Friend speaks very effectively about hoarding disorder. As she has explained, it is a mental health condition in its own right, although it is often confused with obsessive-compulsive disorder. One of my constituents spoke to me about her husband, who has completely filled the living room with items that he just cannot discard. Does my hon. Friend agree that whether it is related to OCD or to another condition, hoarding not only disrupts the lives of the individual who goes through the anxiety and trauma of the condition, but affects others around that individual?
During Prime Minister’s questions this morning, we heard that one in four of us will suffer from a mental health condition. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need to increase mental health support to make it easily accessible and enable it to provide effective treatment, and that such earlier intervention can avoid the deterioration of the condition?
My hon. Friend raises a valuable point. I will come on to that later in my speech, but I absolutely agree that hoarding disrupts people’s lives.
(2 months 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
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend for giving way again. Like others in this room, I have had many constituents ask me to represent them today. One such constituent, Sophie Evans-Carey, has spent the last six months in hospital and just wants to get her life back. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need to increase support and services available for PoTS sufferers? The average time for diagnosis is seven years. We need faster diagnoses and proper funding for treatment to enable people such as Sophie to go back to work, and help the economy in the process.
(5 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI am grateful to the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, and I think I can reassure her on a number of fronts. First, she is absolutely right to call out the disgrace that is corridor care. Despite the best efforts of staff, who suffer the moral injury of treating patients in that situation, in too many parts of the NHS we have patients being treated on trolleys in corridors. In this decade of the 21st century, I think that is unacceptable, as is the emerging nomenclature that has started to describe these as “temporary escalation spaces”, because we are in danger of normalising what should be considered unacceptable practice. That is why this Government will shortly begin transparently publishing corridor care data showing the number of patients being treated on trolleys in corridors. I am sure there will be moments when that might cause Ministers and NHS leaders to blush, but frankly, until corridor care is consigned to history, so we should. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and by publishing the data we will hold ourselves to account, and I am sure this House will hold us to account to ensure that we deliver the conditions that staff and patients deserve.
I also reassure the hon. Member that, while the Casey commission is under way, work on social care goes on, whether that is the £4 billion increase in investment in social care through the decisions taken by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor, or other improvements such as to carer’s allowance, the disabled facilities grant and uplifts in funding for local authorities. However, I am also committed to ensuring that, as we improve the flow of patients through our hospitals and deal with the scourge of delayed discharges, we are a lot better at thinking about how we use the taxpayer pound to best effect to deliver the right care, in the right place and at the right time. That will often mean using NHS resources to commission social care to help tackle delayed discharges, and we will be keeping a close eye on that.
Finally, I thank the hon. Member for joining the voices of reason in this Chamber. I hope it is not lost on the BMA and resident doctors watching that this is not a case of an intransigent Government unwilling to work with and support them who are trying to face down, for political and ideological purposes, a trade union speaking up for its members. This Labour Government have delivered a 28.9% pay increase and we are willing to work further to improve conditions for resident doctors. That work can start now, and I am ready to meet the BMA immediately.
There are other voices of reason in this Chamber, including among the Liberal Democrats, who recognise the pressure on the public finances. They recognise that we are trying to do many things across the NHS that will also directly benefit resident doctors, such as making sure they have the right kit and are working in decent buildings. We are improving the conditions that they are working in and that patients are treated in so that, together, we are building in, working in and being treated in an improving NHS. That is the prize, and that prize is being thrown into jeopardy by the resident doctors’ actions. If they go down this path, with all of the consequences that will follow, I am afraid—for them, let alone for the NHS and for the country—things will get worse rather than better, and I urge them not to take that course of action.
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
Does my right hon. Friend agree that we were right to settle the strikes last year, for the sake of ensuring the future of the NHS, protecting the interests of the public and showing our doctors that they are valued, that that will always be his position, and that it is therefore somewhat surprising that resident doctors have decided to call this strike?
I strongly agree with my hon. Friend—he is absolutely right. I am happy to stand corrected, but there is genuinely no historical precedent in the history of British trade unionism for a trade union to have successfully negotiated with the Government of the day a 28.9% increase for its members and then go out on strike. I think that undermines the BMA, and the more reasonable voices in the BMA with whom we continue to work constructively. It certainly undermines our NHS.
It also reinforces the grossly unfair caricature, which is often thrown at trade unions by the Conservatives, that they are all unreasonable, do not want to work with the Government of the day and are only interested in combat and agitation. In my experience, the vast majority of trade unions and trade unionists are interested in constructive engagement, striking good deals and moving forward the interests not just of their members, but of our whole country. I urge the BMA resident doctors committee to stand in that proud tradition of British trade unionism and in the proud traditions of the wider Labour movement, but I am afraid I do not see those traditions or behaviours reflected in the current approach of the BMA RDC.
(5 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Alex Easton
I totally agree. There is no point in building new houses if we are not going to put in the infrastructure, including health infrastructure and GPs.
While I welcome initiatives aimed at recruiting and retaining GPs, it is concerning that in Northern Ireland we have recruited only 121 GPs when we need 161 merely to restore the levels we had in 2014. The growing UK population, coupled with increasingly complex health needs, is exerting significant pressure on existing resources. In Northern Ireland alone, the population has risen by 70,000 over a decade, while 38 GP practices have closed—a reduction of 11%. It seems clear that as the population grows, funding should increase. We must also recognise that since April 2023, there have been 17 GP contract hand-backs, resulting in a decrease of 12 GP practices, leaving us with a total of 305.
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
Does the hon. Member agree that we need to address the disparity he mentioned—the inequality in GP funding allocations—across the United Kingdom? Despite having some of the most deprived areas with a higher demand, the funding Wolverhampton receives is, on average, 10% less than more affluent areas. The ratio of GPs to patients is therefore lower, which increases the length of time people have to wait to get an appointment with the GP. Does he also agree that the experiences of patients differ? When I speak to my constituents in Wolverhampton West, they give me different accounts of the experiences they have had and the level of service they have received from their GP, depending on the surgery that they use. We need to achieve greater consistency in access to GP surgeries.
Alex Easton
I totally agree with everything the hon. Member says. There are areas across the UK where there are inequalities in people’s access to GPs, and there needs to be a level playing field across the board.
We must consider value for money. Evidence indicates that every £1 invested in GP services yields a £14 return for the local economy. Let me revisit the crucial role of face-to-face appointments. In an increasingly digital world, it is pertinent to ask just how important in-person consultations truly are. While the question is valid, what remains crucial is that face-to-face interactions allow GPs to deliver holistic care that surpasses what is achievable in the virtual environment.
Face-to-face appointments facilitate physical examinations, which are indispensable for accurate diagnosis and treatment planning. While the advances in telemedicine are certainly welcome, physical examinations remain essential for certain symptoms and conditions. In-person consultations are key to effective communication, as they enable GPs to observe non-verbal cues and facial expressions that are crucial in understanding a patient’s needs. Such interactions foster trust, empathy and understanding, greatly enhancing personalised care. This trust encourages patients to be more honest and forthcoming, directly contributing to improved health outcomes. For many vulnerable groups, such as the elderly or individuals living with poor mental health, face-to-face appointments serve as a lifeline. They offer reassurance and a sense of connection, helping to combat isolation and ensure comprehensive care.
In 2022, as we emerged from the covid pandemic, there were 9.7 million GP consultations in Northern Ireland. In 2023, that number increased to 10.1 million. However, we must face the reality that one third of GP practices need the support of the practice improvement crisis response team. I am troubled that with private GP services, we risk creating a two-tier system that exacerbates health inequalities, both in North Down and across Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. We must have a GP service that is accessible to all, not just a service reserved for those who can afford it.
We need to invest in our GP workforce and develop effective retention strategies. I direct the House’s attention to the 17 recommendations made by the Royal College of General Practitioners Northern Ireland in its document “A Workforce Fit for the Future”, which warrants thorough consideration followed by decisive action. Other solutions, such as the Pharmacy First programme, deserve detailed consideration. That practice, enabled across the UK, has been shown to effectively serve deprived communities and has real potential to alleviate the workload on our GPs. Therefore, this challenge is not a matter of choosing one over the other, but rather of finding a balance where digital and face-to-face services complement each other in delivering optimal healthcare.
Patients are becoming increasingly frustrated at not being able to speak to or see their GP. GPs are becoming increasingly frustrated at the ever-increasing workload, which has a knock-on effect, with many people having to go to their nearest accident and emergency unit. Those have some very long waiting times, and that adds more pressure to the health system. I emphasise and underline that access to GP services and face-to-face appointments are vital to maintaining a robust health system across the UK.
As I finish, allow me to pose some questions informed by the Royal College of General Practitioners Northern Ireland. Is it not true that Northern Ireland has the lowest proportion of its healthcare budget allocated to GP services, compared with the rest of the UK? Can anyone point to anywhere that spends less? Does the Minister agree that Northern Ireland deserves better?
(6 months ago)
Commons Chamber
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
I thank my constituency neighbour, hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar), for securing this important debate, and for attempting to remove the stigma and silence that too often surrounds this key area of healthcare.
As has been mentioned, in the UK over 14 million people experience bladder leakage and more than 6.5 million people—around one in 10—struggle with bowel control. However, those figures are probably not a true reflection of the reality, as many individuals choose not to disclose their symptoms, often because of embarrassment or in the mistaken belief that incontinence is simply an inevitable part of ageing.
I want to talk about how women suffering from incontinence have been treated in the past, because we need to focus on the availability of proper treatment options for the future. For far too long, vaginal mesh surgery was widely accepted as the so-called gold standard to treat stress urinary incontinence in women. Between its introduction in 2008 and when its use was paused in 2018, it is believed that over 100,000 women in the UK underwent mesh implant procedures. Sadly, many of them were not properly advised about the alternative options available to treat stress urinary incontinence, such as the physiotherapist-supervised pelvic floor exercises that my hon. Friend mentioned, nor about the risks associated with using vaginal mesh, and some of them sustained life-changing injuries.
Before I became an MP, I worked as a solicitor specialising in representing women who had been affected by vaginal mesh implants and pursuing claims for compensation for them based on clinical negligence. I came across women who were left in constant pain, unable to work or participate in daily aspects of life. Their personal relationships were affected and their lives were changed forever by a treatment that was supposed to help them.
I commend the work of Baroness Cumberlege in her landmark July 2020 report “First Do No Harm”, which recommended that the Government should immediately issue a full apology on behalf of the healthcare system to the families affected by mesh. She also proposed setting up a scheme to meet the cost of providing additional care and support to those who experienced avoidable harm, and networks of specialist centres to provide comprehensive treatment, care and advice for those affected by mesh implants. A subsequent report by Dr Henrietta Hughes, released in February 2024 through the patient safety commissioner, recommended a Government financial and non-financial redress scheme for all those affected by mesh.
Looking ahead, it is critical that current recommended treatments for incontinence are subject to the highest clinical scrutiny and that we take steps to ensure that no more patients are harmed in the pursuit of quick fixes or one-size-fits-all solutions. At the heart of every treatment plan must be the dignity, safety and informed choice of the patient. Treatment must be tailored to the type and severity of each individual’s condition, not determined by cost effectiveness alone. Patient outcomes, not just financial metrics, must be central to how we define value in care for incontinence patients.
We must break the stigma surrounding the issue. A recent study found that around 40% of women had experienced urinary incontinence, yet only 17% of them had sought professional help. Poor continence care, as has already been mentioned, can lead to complications such as infections, social isolation and, in some cases, hospital admissions. Each of those outcomes is completely avoidable with early intervention and treatment, which is something that we must aim for in our healthcare system. Only by tackling the taboo, investing in better treatment pathways and listening to the voices of those affected can we ensure that people living with incontinence are able to access the support they need, and to do so with the dignity that they deserve.
(6 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI have already given a history lesson about some of those 14 years. When the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats were in the coalition together, we had a commitment, a promise and a cross-party agreement; the Conservatives then got into government by themselves and broke it, so we are where we are. We want to invest in social care, which is why we have announced the £4 billion. We are seeing a very interesting alliance going on between our Green and Conservative colleagues; they agree on something, as we saw in the Lobby last week.
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her statement and the excellent work that this Government are doing in bringing additional investment in the NHS and bringing waiting lists down. We have had to make really difficult decisions to clear up the mess left by the previous Government, and I am sure we all agree that we need to protect our charitable adult social care providers. Will the Minister facilitate a meeting with myself and Woodlands Quaker Home in my constituency, which provides non-profit residential social care for older people so that they are able to carry on in the best way possible?
(6 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Caroline Voaden
I could not agree more—I am sure I will agree with most of the interventions in this debate.
This does not have to be the outcome. We know that with the right support at the right time, people can live well with dementia at home, and that reduces pressure on services and improves quality of life.
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
One in four hospital beds are occupied by someone living with dementia, and there is a 50% higher hospital readmissions rate for those who have dementia than the general population, with one in three people living with the condition never receiving a diagnosis. Does the hon. Member agree that the key is to get that early diagnosis, so that help and support can come in early, which will have better prospects for the individual and their families?
Caroline Voaden
I absolutely agree that early diagnosis is one of the key things that makes a difference to anyone living with dementia.
We talk a lot about social care in this place, and the Liberal Democrats have championed the cause of carers—those thousands of people who quietly and lovingly dedicate themselves to caring for someone they love, often someone suffering from dementia. These carers are, because of the nature of this disease, often elderly themselves and, because of a postcode lottery, are sometimes left to just get on with it themselves without the vital support and advice that they so desperately need.
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
I thank the hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) for securing this important debate. As Members across the House have rightly highlighted, dementia remains one of the most urgent health and social care challenges facing our country. One in two of us will be affected by it in our lifetime, whether through our own diagnosis, caring for a loved one or both.
Over 14,200 people in the Black Country live with dementia, including over 3,000 in city of Wolverhampton. That number is expected to more than double over the next 10 years. As lack of early diagnosis is an issue and prevents proper dementia care, and considering the prevalence of dementia in our communities, I am pleased that 67% of people with dementia in Wolverhampton have been formally diagnosed as having the condition, compared to 62% nationally and 59% across the west midlands. These are more than just statistics; each number represents the individuals, families and communities living with the daily realities of this cruel condition.
The total annual cost of dementia in England reached £42 billion in 2024, and that is set to double in the next 15 years. More than half the cost is shouldered by unpaid carers—the family members and friends who often go without support, recognition or respite. I welcome the Government’s recent increase in the carer’s allowance earnings threshold, which will enable more carers to remain in work while continuing to receive the support they rely on. That is certainly a step in the right direction, but if we are serious about improving dementia care, we must start with the chronic underfunding of our social care system, which is fragmented, overstretched and under-resourced. We cannot rely on good will alone, so I urge the Government to commit to sustainable, long-term funding for our social care sector—for the workers, for community-based services and for specialist dementia provision.
I am proud that the city of Wolverhampton, which is within my constituency of Wolverhampton West, has been recognised as a dementia-friendly community by the Alzheimer’s Society, with over 13,000 dementia friends across the city. I particularly commend the work of Alz Café in my constituency, which is an independent, volunteer-led service providing a warm, welcoming space for people living with dementia and their families. With live music, hot meals and compassionate support, it is a lifeline for many, and it is run entirely free of charge.
Community-led initiatives are vital, but we cannot allow them to become a substitute for a robust national care infrastructure in our NHS and our country. Volunteers and charities play an incredible role, but they cannot carry the burden alone. Dementia care should therefore be included in the NHS 10-year health plan, as advocated by Dementia UK, with more specialist dementia nurses in our hospitals and in the community to deliver timely, person-centred care, which can save on costs by reducing hospital stays. It is beyond time for us to have a properly funded, co-ordinated national approach to social care that ensures that everyone affected by dementia can access the crucial care and support that they so need.
It is important that we have timely diagnosis of dementia, particularly given that young-onset dementia is becoming common, and age-appropriate support. Dementia care is vital for the future health of us all.
Sorcha Eastwood (Lagan Valley) (Alliance)
My constituent Silé’s husband developed early onset dementia at the age of 38. Nobody knew what it was initially, because they were not expecting a normal, healthy 38-year-old to have early-onset dementia. Does the hon. Member agree that we need to do much more right across the UK to highlight that dementia and Alzheimer’s can develop at any age?
Warinder Juss
The hon. Lady is absolutely right: we need to take urgent action, and earlier. There are now cases of people having got dementia even as early as the age of 50 without knowing that they have the condition because there is no diagnosis, so I agree with the hon. Lady.
(8 months, 1 week ago)
Commons Chamber
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
Will the hon. Lady join me in commending Compton Care hospice in my constituency? The hospice, which I visited recently, does great work raising funds, and it really welcomed the £100 million support provided by this Government. However, the hospice emphasised to me that if it was not there to provide social care, therapy and respite care for patients and their families, the NHS would need an extra 100 beds. Hospices provide invaluable services to our communities, which makes it so important for us to continue to support them as much as we can.
The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point about the pressure that hospices take off the NHS. The wonderful work of the hospice the hon. Gentleman mentions is the reason the NHS can function in the way it does. The cost savings on palliative care—both in hospital and out-of-hospital care settings—are invaluable. The hospices in our constituencies are a model that already works, and they are trusted by the community. I think we should be funding that model, instead of allowing hospices to die on the vine because of a lack of funding and changes to the funding model. I thank the hon. Gentleman for that point.