Category: Health

  • Charlie Maynard – 2026 Speech on Tissue Freezing for Advanced Brain Cancer Treatment

    Charlie Maynard – 2026 Speech on Tissue Freezing for Advanced Brain Cancer Treatment

    The statement made by Charlie Maynard, the Liberal Democrat MP for Witney, in Westminster Hall on 7 January 2026.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western. I thank the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) for securing the debate, and I thank Ellie for all her work, as well as Hugh and the others who are pushing very hard on this issue—many thanks indeed.

    I want to try to make this debate a bit broader in two directions. My sister, Georgie, also has a glioblastoma. She was diagnosed two and a half years ago and has been incredibly brave and determined, working with the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) and Ellie to try to get more brain cancer justice, and driving that debate. That also applies to many people in my constituency of Witney who have brain tumours but also tumours of all sorts of cancers.

    We ought to be considering two things. First, I ask the Minister to consider making tumour tissue freezing standard for all cancerous tumour tissues, not just brain. However close the issue is to my heart, I think it is inequitable to just focus on brain tumours. We have to try to get all tumour tissues frozen as standard, and the economies of scale mean that makes sense.

    The other thing is how we have equitable and public health-oriented access to that tissue once it is stored, which we as a country are massively failing on. I ask the Minister to consider reforming the Human Tissue Act 2004, which could be broadened in terms of what is legally permitted in research contexts. That would create explicit legal pathways for retrospective clinical samples.

    First, clinical tissue, such as biopsies and diagnostic archives, could be routinely made available for public health research under clear safeguards, without requiring separate project-by-project consent. Secondly, requirements for de-identified tissue could be simplified, clarifying that truly anonymised, non-identifiable samples can be used without consent or an HTA licence for a wider range of research, rather than just narrowly defined exceptions.

    Thirdly, licences could be converted to broader authorisations. Instead of a licence for each tissue bank, accredited biobanks could be allowed to supply samples under nationally recognised frameworks. Fourthly, DNA analysis rules could be reworked. Barriers to genomic public health research could be reduced by redefining or narrowing the offence of having tissue for DNA analysis, provided that strong data protection is ensured. That is one big chunk.

    The second big chunk I am asking for—there are only two—is that we reform the Human Tissue Act 2004 to apply a default system similar to the one we now use nationally for organ donation to tumour tissue data. To do so, Parliament would need to amend the HTA to introduce a deemed consent regime for residual tumour tissue and derived data. That would be limited to public interest cancer research, with a statutory and simple opt-out, strict purpose limits and enhanced oversight by the Human Tissue Authority.

    The model would mirror the Organ Donation (Deemed Consent) Act 2019, but apply just to data derived primarily from tumour tissue. In plain English, that means that we have something that works for organ donations and saves lives day in, day out. If any of us die, our organs are taken and our next of kin can opt out if they choose. The great majority of people do not opt out. That has meant that many more organs have been available, which has saved lives. Somebody may want to dispose of their tumour tissue, but the great majority of us do not; we would want it used for public health and science, so having it as an automatic—

    Monica Harding

    I am sorry to stop my hon. Friend mid flow, because that is a really interesting concept. I draw his attention to a BBC article from today about using centuries-old samples of tumours from bowel cancer to work out why there is such a massive increase in bowel cancer among young people. I do not understand the science of it, but surely that is a step forward for our research as well.

    Charlie Maynard

    My hon. Friend speaks to the point. Of course, those people have been dead for many centuries, but we believe it is worth being able to access that information, and at the moment it is not accessible in most cases. That is something we really want to change.

    I look to Denmark’s registry-first legal architecture, with mandatory health registries covering cancer diagnoses, pathology, genomics, and treatment and outcomes. The Danish cancer registry automatically records tumour data, covers the entire population and is used for research, oversight and quality improvement. Participation is automatic, with opt-outs rather than being consent-based. Our Government are seeking to rapidly expand our national genomics capabilities, and I applaud them for that, but without far better and more sensible access to the base tissue, with appropriate safeguards, there is no genomics-based, population-wide health service.

  • Chris Evans – 2026 Speech on Tissue Freezing for Advanced Brain Cancer Treatment

    Chris Evans – 2026 Speech on Tissue Freezing for Advanced Brain Cancer Treatment

    The speech made by Chris Evans, the Labour MP for Caerphilly, in Westminster Hall on 7 January 2026.

    I beg to move,

    That this House has considered patient access to tissue freezing for advanced brain cancer treatment, diagnostics and research.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western—you look remarkably like the man I had breakfast with 45 minutes ago.

    I am pleased that this topic is getting the attention it deserves, and I am grateful to open this important debate, especially ahead of Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week, which begins on 13 January. I must confess I knew relatively little about the effects of brain cancer until I met my constituent, Ellie James. Ellie has travelled from Wales today and is in the Gallery. I admire how tirelessly she has campaigned in memory of her late husband, Owain, who has brought us all here today.

    Owain passed away from glioblastoma, the most common type of malignant brain tumour in adults, in June 2024. He was just 34 years of age. Since then Ellie has been campaigning for what she calls Owain’s law to be implemented in this country. Owain was young, fit and healthy, and he had his whole life ahead of him. He leaves behind a family, including a young daughter. Owain’s story highlights the importance of informed consent from patients and their families regarding treatment and the storage of their brain tissue.

    Owain was diagnosed with a brain tumour in September 2022. Half of Owain’s 14 cm tumour was surgically removed, but only 1 cm of the removed tissue was stored fresh or flash frozen. The 1 cm was used to treat Owain with a form of immunotherapy treatment that requires the patient’s frozen tissue. Owain received three rounds of the vaccine before the frozen tissue ran out, at which point further surgery was not considered possible. The remaining 6 cm of tissue was stored in paraffin, making it unsuitable for additional vaccines.

    Owain died a few months later, despite his cancer showing signs of regression during the treatment. If all the removed tissue had been fresh frozen, around 30 vaccines could have been created. If Owain and his family had been more informed about the practices surrounding brain tissue freezing and storage, and if the hospital had chosen the flash-freezing method for all the removed tissue instead of keeping it in paraffin, Owain could still be with us. His story is truly devastating, but what most stood out to me was that there was a real, achievable potential to extend, if not save, his life.

    The amount of grief that Ellie and Owain’s family face must be tremendous and unimaginable. However, out of grief great change can take place, and I pay tribute to Ellie for her determination to turn her unimaginable grief into something positive that can help others. There is currently no consistent national guidance or sufficient infrastructure to ensure that brain tumour tissue removed during surgery can be stored in the fresh frozen state required for advanced therapies such as immunotherapy and cancer research. It is fundamentally wrong that Owain and his family learned of the small proportion of tissue initially frozen only once the vaccines ran out. I am sure they are not the only people that that will have happened to.

    For every patient diagnosed with a less survivable cancer, the average one-year survival rate is 42%. That is compared with a one-year survival rate of 70% for all cancers. Those statistics need to improve. There are procedures surrounding brain tissue freezing that can be changed, which would have an undeniably positive impact on survival rates. There are already groups doing research and drawing attention to what can be done to improve outcomes for people with cancer, such as the all-party parliamentary group on the less survivable cancers. There are also charities such as Cancer Research UK and Macmillan that conduct valuable research and support cancer patients and their families. Again, I pay tribute to them.

    There are, however, specific recommendations that I would like to mention, which link specifically to Owain and many others who face similar situations. The NHS needs an appropriate number of medical freezers to store fresh frozen tissue. In many cases, there is not enough freezer space to facilitate this type of brain tissue freezing. That must change. That long-term investment would save lives.

    Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)

    Brain cancer is one of the deadliest cancers, and it disproportionately affects young adults: it is the big cancer killer of people under 40. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that this proposal not only would save lives at a relatively small cost but has an economic benefit? The Brain Tumour Charity points out that most people diagnosed have to give up work, and so do their carers: 70% of carers also have to give up work to look after those afflicted. There is an economic benefit to doing this, at a relatively low cost, and of course it would save lives.

    Chris Evans

    The hon. Lady is absolutely right. We have to remember that a cancer diagnosis affects not just the person, but their family and loved ones. A lot of people have to leave work to care for those people, and they have to deal with the emotional impact too. Her economic point is absolutely right. The wider point is that we lead the world in life sciences. If we did what I am suggesting, we could be a world leader in brain cancer care and we could save lives too, so it is a win-win for everybody.

    As the hon. Lady said, the change is cost effective. It is estimated that it would cost £250,000 to £400,000 to ensure that all NHS trusts have the necessary capacity and capabilities for flash freezing. Every brain cancer patient should be able to access the latest treatment and research and the most accurate genome-sequencing techniques.

    In Owain’s case, there was enough freezer space, so storing his tissue in paraffin was a conscious decision not made out of necessity. That is why attitudes and established guidance protocols within the NHS about brain tissue freezing need to change. It should not be the norm to store removed brain tissue in something that makes it unusable for further research or treatment. I hope the Minister will commit to establishing national standards so that every suitable brain tumour sample is routinely frozen.

    A brain tumour can happen to anyone. It could affect us or any of our loved ones. This change needs to happen now to save lives in the future. It needs to happen for people such as Owain who are no longer with us, for people who are currently unwell with brain cancer and for people who will unfortunately become ill in the future. This Labour Government have a real opportunity to enact meaningful, positive and feasible change. We must seize that, especially if it is achievable and affordable.

    As I said earlier, we lead the world in life sciences, and brain cancer care is something that we can proudly be world leaders in. The national cancer plan, which will be published next month, must address the storage of brain tissue. Specifically, it must outline exactly how it will improve outcomes for patients with less survivable cancers. If we are serious about putting patients at the heart of cancer care, improving their awareness of the storage of their own tissue is one of the simplest places to start.

    The way that treatment is allocated is deeply unfair. The postcode lottery of cancer treatment must end. It is wrong that a person’s ability to access cancer treatment is dependent on where they live: 40% of people with cancer in the UK have struggled to access treatment or care because of where they live. That is ineffective, unfair and discriminatory. Those are not the values that a Labour Government should uphold. For the cost of a few hundred thousand pounds, we could eliminate the postcode lottery that affects brain cancer patients. We need to ensure that all types of treatment, including experimental ones involving freezers and vaccines, can succeed in all areas, not only some. That exceptionally small investment could have a lifesaving impact.

    It is not only treatment that is affected by current protocol, but research. Owain’s tissue was no longer suitable for research because it was stored in paraffin. It is also incredibly difficult for a person to have control over their own tissue post extraction. The confusion about who technically owns it makes it challenging for people such as Ellie to retrieve the remaining tissue for further testing or research. We need to stop putting unnecessary barriers in place. We are making things harder than they need to be, and these practices have a direct impact on people’s everyday lives.

    It is just as alarming that all this is done without informed consent from the patient or their families. The importance of the storage method for brain tissue cannot be overstated when someone’s life relies upon it. Brain cancer patients and their families should have an absolute right to be consulted on and to give informed consent on how their tumour is stored. While we have the opportunity to make these changes in the national cancer plan for England, we must do so. It is a small, affordable change that could have a huge impact and improve cancer treatment nationwide.

    This issue was debated in the Welsh Senedd in July, and I wonder if the Minister could liaise with the Welsh Government about introducing a similar plan. I understand that the Minister there said he was not minded to introduce legislation. Could she raise this topic with him in bilateral meetings at some point? I was also hoping to get a commitment from the Minister today to meet me and my constituent Ellie, so that Ellie can explain in detail her husband Owain’s experience and we can discuss how to prevent the same thing happening to current and future patients.

    In matters of great importance like this, patients must be aware of what is happening to their tissue during treatment and afterwards. Families should be able to access their tissue if needed for future testing and research. I urge the Minister to think of real people like Owain, Ellie and their young daughter, whose lives could be so different now if patients were consulted, if the tissue was stored differently and if there were more medical freezers. I would specifically like to know the Government’s plans regarding brain tissue freezing, given the impact it would have on diagnostics, treatment and research. Do the Government plan to invest in freezer capacity, and do they intend to make flash freezing the norm?

    While brain tumours will continue to happen to people like Owain or anyone in this room, diagnostics, treatment and research can get better. The Government can lead the way and begin to change the attitudes and practices surrounding brain tissue freezing—in fact, we must do so. I do not wish to hear another story like Owain and Ellie’s, which is absolutely tragic, and I want Ellie’s campaign to succeed; it can and must. The most devastating thing is that Owain’s outcomes could have been different if the established guidance protocol had been different. Perhaps if these things had happened, Owain could have been sitting with Ellie in the Public Gallery today.

  • Paul Davies – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Paul Davies – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Paul Davies, the Labour MP for Colne Valley, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    Forty-seven per cent of cancers diagnosed in the UK are rare and less common cancers, and 55% of deaths are from rare and less common cancers. That means that, every year, around 180,000 people will be diagnosed with a rare and less common cancer, and more than 92,000 people will die from such cancers. Blood cancer is one such cancer, and I recently met the Blood Cancer Alliance to discuss improving access to lifesaving blood cancer treatments across the UK. Over 280,000 people in the UK are living with blood cancer, and every year 40,000 more receive a diagnosis, including 5,000 children. It is the fifth most common cancer, the most prevalent childhood cancer and the third biggest cancer killer in our country. However, despite amazing advances in tech and treatment, our outcomes are falling behind in the nations.

    The reason is clear: systemic barriers within the NHS and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence appraisal processes are preventing patients from accessing innovative therapies. Between 2019 and 2025, over a third of NICE appraisals for new blood cancer treatments were terminated—more than double the rate for other cancers. Those are not ineffective drugs; many are available overseas, and even privately in the UK. That creates a two-tier system in which those who can pay receive better care than those who cannot. It is unacceptable. I have been told that treatments such as chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy can transform lives, extending survival and improving quality of life.

    The current system, with rigid cost-effectiveness thresholds and inflexible commercial frameworks, is failing patients. That is why I warmly welcome the UK Government’s cancer plan, which represents a vital opportunity to reset our approach to cancer care and to ensure that innovation is embraced, not obstructed. By prioritising timely access to effective treatments and addressing systemic barriers, the cancer plan can help deliver world-class outcomes for patients.

    I stand with the Blood Cancer Alliance and Cancer52 in calling for urgent, joined-up action from Government, NICE, the NHS and industry. Together we can ensure that every person with blood cancer has timely access to the best possible care, because survival should never depend on postcode or income.

  • Vikki Slade – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Vikki Slade – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Vikki Slade, the Liberal Democrat MP for Mid Dorset and North Poole, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    I thank the hon. Member for Southport (Patrick Hurley) for that really moving account. We know that cancer affects us all. In my family it claimed my mum Lin; my sister-in-law Lisa and my stepmum Sally have both beaten it, and now my dad Ray is living with terminal cancer. One of my team is also undergoing treatment for cancer, so we know that it is prevalent among all our lives. All of them were fit, healthy people who did everything right, as are so many others each year who get the horrible news or—worse—turn up in A&E after becoming suddenly unwell. According to a Cancer Research study, many of those patients had visited their GP but had not been referred for tests, either because they did not meet the thresholds or because they had been missed altogether. This is not a criticism of our GPs, who are working in highly difficult situations. Indeed, when I shadowed Dr Wright from Walford Mill surgery in Wimborne, he had the sober task of sharing a diagnosis and undertaking a very personal test during his appointment, which he let me witness.

    If diagnosis doubled across the six least survivable cancers alone, an additional 7,500 lives a year would be saved. Each year in my constituency of Mid Dorset and North Poole, there are 540 diagnoses of cancer and 300 cancer deaths. Although 85% of them should be starting treatment within 62 days, the number is actually only 60%. What is the Minister doing to bridge that gap? If we met the target in my constituency, 70 additional people would be getting on with their lives. Across the country, 45,000 additional people would be given a greater chance of not just surviving but having a life shared with those they love.

    Furthermore, once they get to hospital, patients are faced with out-of-date machinery and not enough specialist nurses. Macmillan Cancer Support says there is an acute shortage and calls for a cancer nurse fund to increase the numbers by 3,700. Will the future cancer strategy include such funding?

    I want to speak briefly about pancreatic cancer, which claimed the life of my cousin Colin, a super-fit former Welsh Commonwealth games cyclist who died in his 50s despite the best care available. Many other constituents have written to me about poor prognosis for this treatment. They have flagged that the NHS has approved selective internal radiation therapy, but only for colorectal and liver cancers—not those whose primary cancer was in the pancreas and then spread to the liver. These families are keen for urgent trials to be undertaken to allow the treatment to be used, given the incredibly short life expectancy faced by patients. Will the Minister consider that?

    We have been waiting such a long time for this cancer strategy. We need the workforce plan and the road map for the NHS plan. Nine hundred and fifty people will be diagnosed with cancer today, and those people need hope.

  • Patrick Hurley – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Patrick Hurley – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Patrick Hurley, the Labour MP for Southport, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week is an important marker in the calendar, but I want to talk about another important marker when it comes to these cancers—one that is important for me and my family anyway—because this year marks 20 years since I was made unavoidably aware of the devastation of oesophageal cancer. In May of that year, my father developed the classic symptoms: difficulty swallowing, feeling like food was getting stuck, heartburn and weight loss. He was diagnosed in August and died on 23 December: from becoming symptomatic to losing his life was just seven months. The rapidity of the decline was overwhelming. Barely had he been diagnosed than he was given a terminal diagnosis. I must admit, though, that I was not giving my father my full attention during that time. In almost any other circumstances I would have been a much more dutiful son, but my own focus was elsewhere that year. On 1 August 2006, my wife Susan also became symptomatic with oesophageal cancer. She was diagnosed on 11 September and died on 14 November.

    The speed with which I read that sentence reflects the speed with which Sue died. There was barely any chance to understand what was happening, to seek help or for the family to manage. That is not unusual with these sorts of diseases. It is the sort of story that thousands of us know. Crucially, for my Southport constituency, it is also a story that disproportionately impacts people from the north-west and from north Wales. For my family, there was not any long fight or slow decline—only shock, confusion, urgent decisions and death. That is what a less survivable cancer looks like.

    May I make a clear ask of the Minister today? I am asking for a personal commitment, and a commitment across Government, to drive up survival rates for all these less survivable cancers, but most urgently—for my personal history and for the geographical distribution that shows that my part of the country has higher levels than elsewhere in the UK—for oesophageal cancer. That could mean things such as early diagnosis, recognising that one size fits all does not work. It could mean fast-track treatment pathways once suspicion is raised. Above all else, it should include serious investment in experimental and pre-symptomatic techniques, finding ways to detect cancers before symptoms even appear. These are difficult cancers to deal with, and that is why they need targeted action. I am here today because two people I loved did not get the help they needed, so I urge the Government to help other families avoid that same fate.

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Siobhain McDonagh, the Labour MP for Mitcham and Morden, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    I thank the hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) for organising this debate. My purpose is to find a cure for glioblastoma brain tumours, the biggest cancer killer of children and adults under 40, with a life expectancy from diagnosis of just nine months and a five-year survival rate of 5%. The only way to find a cure and improve outcomes for a cancer that has seen no improvement in 30 years is through drug trials.

    In the absence of commercial or charitable glioblastoma drug trials, we launched our own trial in memory of my late sister, Margaret, in July last year. The trial is being run by Dr Paul Mulholland, Europe’s leading consultant on glioblastoma, who is based at University College London. It will include 16 newly diagnosed patients at University College hospital. This is a pre-surgery immunotherapy trial focused on patients who have received no prior treatment. The drug is given before surgery, allowing the immune system to attack the tumour before it is removed.

    I am delighted to confirm that we have already recruited five patients and, while the trial remains at an early stage, we are encouraged by the early findings. This is only the start. This journey has proven extraordinarily difficult and has been possible only because of an alignment of factors that very few will ever encounter: access to one of Europe’s leading clinicians working from a major London teaching hospital, alongside a world-class university; a group of my sister’s friends who have campaigned tirelessly and raised more than £1 million in two years; and the engagement and backing of the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to get the trial over the line.

    Our ambition is to establish 10 such trials using 10 different immunotherapy drugs, but ultimately our ability to raise money will end. How can Dr Mulholland apply for funding to support the programme of trials using repurposed immunotherapy drugs? Can the Minister’s team provide a written explanation and a link setting out how a bid can be made to the NIHR to access those funds? It is a straight question, and I would welcome a straight answer.

  • Steff Aquarone – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Steff Aquarone – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Steff Aquarone, the Liberal Democrat MP for North Norfolk, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) on securing the debate. He is a truly committed campaigner on cancer care.

    Over previous decades, we have managed to achieve great progress on cancer care and survival. Many cancers now have high survival rates and straightforward detection and treatment, and survivors live long and happy lives. However, that is not the case across the board, and the less survivable cancers are the prime examples. Survival rates remain stubbornly low, treatment rates are shockingly low and the situation facing someone who is diagnosed with a less survivable cancer is often unacceptable.

    I want to describe how these deadly cancers, and access to care for them, impact people in rural communities such as mine. Every day that such cancers go undetected reduces the likelihood of survival, but too many constituents either struggle to secure a GP appointment or have difficulty navigating our ailing transport system to attend one. Those who have been diagnosed and are receiving specialist treatment are likely to have to journey outside North Norfolk to Norfolk and Norwich University hospital, or to Addenbrooke’s in Cambridge.

    I warmly welcome the fact that Cromer hospital delivers chemotherapy to more than 30 patients a day in its new cancer centre, but there is still only one cancer treatment available within my constituency. Additionally, the loss of convalescence care beds in my area means that there are fewer opportunities for people to recover from major treatments closer to home.

    Looking to the future, I am pleased to see new diagnostic tools and treatment options being brought forward by talented researchers across the country. The revolutionary breath test for pancreatic and other less survivable cancers could be a real game changer. However, I have real concerns that when those new and revolutionary tools and treatments are rolled out, rural areas such as North Norfolk may wait longer to receive the benefits. I hope the Minister can reassure me that her Department is working to ensure that any newly approved treatments and diagnostic tools will be just as easily available in rural communities as they are in the big cities.

    I am grateful to all the charities that make up the Less Survivable Cancers Taskforce for their hard work and advocacy for patients, survivors and loved ones who have felt overlooked for too long. They also do vital work in making us all aware of the symptoms we should watch out for, and when to speak to our GP if something does not seem right. I hope that as we come to Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week, people in North Norfolk will take the time to learn the signs and symptoms, because when we catch these deadly cancers early, lives can be saved.

  • Wes Streeting – 2025 Speech on the Winter Preparedness of the NHS

    Wes Streeting – 2025 Speech on the Winter Preparedness of the NHS

    The speech made by Wes Streeting, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, in the House of Commons on 15 December 2025.

    The NHS’s national medical director says:

    “This unprecedented wave of super flu is leaving the NHS facing a worst-case scenario”.

    This is backed up by the data. On any given day last week, an average of 2,500 patients were in hospital beds—a 55% increase on the week before, and almost double the number from 2023. One hundred and six flu patients are in intensive care, compared with 69 the previous week. There are 1,300 more staff off than in the week before, and the number of calls received by NHS 111 last week was 446,000—8% higher than at this time last year.

    It is clear from both the NHS and UK Health Security Agency data that there is a real risk for the NHS and for patients, and it is at this moment of maximum danger that the British Medical Association has chosen to go ahead with Christmas strikes, when they will inflict the greatest level of damage on the NHS.

    The BMA said this dispute was about pay, but we gave doctors a 28.9% pay rise. Then it said it was also about jobs, so I offered a deal to halve the competition for jobs to less than two applicants per post. It is now clear what these strikes are really about—the BMA’s fantasy demand for another 26% pay rise on top of the 28.9% doctors have already received. I also offered to extend the BMA strike mandate, so it could postpone this action and go ahead once flu has subsided. The fact that it also rejected that offer shows a shocking disregard for patient safety. Since this strike represents a different magnitude of risk from previous industrial action, I am appealing to ordinary resident doctors to ignore the BMA strike and go to work this week. Abandoning patients in their hour of greatest need goes against everything that a career in medicine is meant to be about.

    The entire focus of my Department and the NHS team is now on getting the health service through the double whammy of flu and strikes. We have already vaccinated 17 million people, which is 170,000 more than last year, and 60,000 more NHS staff. We have invested in 500 new ambulances, 40 new same-day emergency care and urgent treatment centres, and 15 mental health crisis assessment centres. The NHS will also be recalling resident doctors to work in emergency situations, and we will not tolerate the dangerous attempts to block such requests that we have seen from the BMA in the past.

    I am proud of the way that the NHS team has pulled together through strike action in the past, and I know they will move heaven and earth to keep patients as safe as they can this winter. I am just appalled that they are having to do so without the support of their colleagues in the BMA.

    Stuart Andrew

    This winter, a serious flu wave and rising respiratory syncytial virus infections are pushing the NHS to its limits. Flu admissions, as we have heard, are up 55% in a week, and RSV cases are rising, especially in older people. However, the Government have failed to prepare, as we pointed out earlier in the year.

    In July, the Health Secretary accepted Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation advice to expand the RSV vaccine to over-80s, but that expansion seems to have been quietly dropped. Flu vaccine uptake remains dangerously low, with fewer than 30% of some key groups vaccinated. Most worryingly, that includes NHS staff, who are going off sick because of flu, adding to staffing pressures. Delayed discharges are worsening: 19,000 more bed days have been lost this year. Still there is no winter discharge plan, no new funding and no clarity—and today, yes, resident doctors confirmed further strike action this week, which will add pressure to a system already under significant strain. That is why we would ban strike action, but at the same time this Government are literally making it easier for unions through their Employment Rights Bill.

    When the NHS is under this level of pressure, families deserve the reassurance that care will be there when they need it, so I ask the Secretary of State: will he now publish the Government’s plan for managing winter pressures, including on delayed discharges and emergency care? Given that he is worried about a double whammy of rising flu cases and a strike, what extra resources is he providing, and if he is not, where is the money coming from? What action will he take to ensure RSV vaccine access for older people, and what will he do to raise flu vaccine uptake in vulnerable groups, particularly in NHS staff? Families are frightened, and some are already grieving. This crisis was not inevitable, but the Government’s failure to prepare has made it much worse.

    Wes Streeting

    I will ignore the political nonsense about banning strikes and clamping down on trade unions. I will, however, take on directly the charge that we have not prepared for this winter.

    We have delivered over 17 million flu vaccinations this season—hundreds of thousands more than this time last year—and 60,000 more NHS staff than last year are also getting their jab. We are on track to deliver the 5 percentage points increase in flu vaccine uptake in healthcare workers, as set out in our urgent and emergency care plan. On children and young people, half a million two to three-year-olds have been vaccinated, which is the same as last year, and 3.6 million school-age children have been vaccinated, which is up 100,000 on last year. We will be going back to schools to do repeat visits in areas where uptake in schools has not been as high as we would like. For care home residents, flu vaccination uptake is 71%. We are on track to meet the RSV vaccination uptake target for 2025-26 in the published urgent and emergency care plan, so we are doing a lot on the vaccination front to prepare.

    In fact, on winter planning more generally, we started earlier and did more than ever to prepare for this winter. We had stress-tested winter plans trust by trust. Local NHS leaders ran scenario-based exercises, including managing surges in demand and responding to virus outbreaks to test and strengthen their winter readiness plans, which are now being put into action. We have strengthened access by boosting GP access to keep people well and out of hospital. Through advertising campaigns, new online access routes and more GP practices open for longer hours over the Christmas period, we are making sure more people can be seen closer to home. That matters, because when people can get help early from their GP, they are less likely to end up in A&E.

    We are also going further to improve our urgent and emergency care performance this winter. That is set out in our urgent and emergency care plan. We are investing almost £450 million into UEC this winter, meaning: 500 new ambulances on the roads; expanding same-day and urgent treatment centres; providing targeted support to the most challenged trusts; creating capacity and keeping flow moving by sharing weekly data with trusts; encouraging the use of alternative community services; and streamlining in-hospital discharge processes to get patients discharged more quickly from hospital when it is safe to do so, including joining up the NHS and social care, where relationships between health and social care have been improving year on year. If I think about where we are this year compared to last year, there has been sustained improvement. A lot done; more to do.

    Of course our job is made harder by strike action. That is why the Government are doing everything we possibly can to get the NHS through this winter. I just wish we were doing it with the BMA, rather than against the BMA.

  • Wes Streeting – 2025 Speech to the NHS Providers Conference

    Wes Streeting – 2025 Speech to the NHS Providers Conference

    The speech made by Wes Streeting, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, in Manchester on 12 November 2025.

    Thanks so much for that introduction, and thanks to all of you for being here.  

    I’m delighted to be here given the, or to give, the announcement that everyone’s been talking about in the news today. That is the government’s reforms to NHS system architecture.  

    And I’m really grateful, Daniel, for the leadership for you and NHS Providers is showing at such a challenging time, but before I get into the challenges, let me just start with the positives. Because right now, we’re achieving things in the NHS. We’ve not seen for a long, long time and I know it’s not been easy. I’ve made considerable demands on you. And will continue to do so. But you’ve shown over the last year, or so, that while the NHS was broken, it wasn’t beaten. 

    You provided 5 million more elective appointments, 135,000 more cancer, diagnoses within the 28-day target, and cut waiting lists by over 200,000. Ambulance response times and 12-hour waits in A&E are down. There are two and a half thousand more GPs. In fact, we now have the highest number of GPs on record. 

    You’ve opened over a hundred Community Diagnostic Centres at evenings and weekends. New surgical hubs to bust the backlog. The extra doctors, nurses and mental health staff we need to treat patients on time and together, we built the 10-year plan for health to create the truly modern health service that we’re all crying out for. 

    These are the green shoots of recovery that are beginning to renew confidence and restore faith in our National Health Service for both patients and for our staff, our investment and modernisation are paying off. And with it, ambition and optimism are returning. It’s why I can come here today and say, with credibility, that we can still cut waiting times to 18 weeks, by the end of this Parliament. 

    Something few thought possible when we made the commitment in opposition. And while we can do it, and we can do it while delivering year-on-year improvements to Urgent and Emergency Care, we can get back to seeing people within four hours and while rebuilding general practice, so that patients can get an appointment with their doctor when they need one. 

    So, I want to begin by saying to all of you genuinely. Thank you. There’s sometimes a perception out there that I’m going to have to really battle this system and all of you to modernise and it’s such a misrepresentation of the leaders I work with. NHS leaders and frontline staff are not only chomping at the bit for change. You’re the ones showing the world that it can be delivered.

    There’s a real can-do culture back in the NHS, but and it’s a big but – there is also a great deal of jeopardy, out there from economic constraints, winter pressures, industrial action. And the political forces willing us all to fail. 

    So there’s a lot of pressure on our shoulders, because we all know how important the NHS is to our country. How central it is to the lives of every family in this land. And how strongly we believe in the values that have underpinned it since 1948, values that are becoming increasingly contested. 

    So, it’s important, I think for us to keep in mind, the consequences, if we get this wrong. Millions are counting on us and there’s much much more to do, so this isn’t the moment to ease off the gas. This is the moment to push our foot harder on the accelerator. 

    One reason why we see renewed confidence is the rigid focus you’ve brought to reducing waste and increasing productivity while improving services at the same time. In fact, reducing waste and increasing productivity are essential to improving patient services and staff experience.  

    This government is investing an extra £26 billion in the NHS this year. 

    We continue to be relative winners of Budgets and Spending Reviews. Although you and I know what the word relative means which is why I’m always relatively happy at how we do at Budget time. And we owe it to patients, to staff and to taxpayers to make sure that every penny that’s going into this service is money well spent. 

    That’s why I’m really proud that for the first time in years, the NHS is in balance, seven months into the financial year. It’s not going to be easy to stay on track for the rest of this year, especially with the double whammy of strikes and winter to come. 

    But breaking even is a huge shift from the £6.6 billion deficit we were looking at.

    There are people out there saying that universal health care, free at the point of need is no longer affordable or possible. And everyone in this room and beyond is proving them wrong.  

    So, this isn’t just a technocratic accounting triumph. It is the foundation of everything else because it’s ultimately what will allow us to invest again in staff technology and services, all of which add up to better patient experience. It also gives me, but all of us, credibility with the Chancellor. The government inherited public finances with a £22 billion black hole. 

    And it won’t have escape your notice that the public finances and the wider economy are still under serious strain. So, there is no money to waste and I think that it’s really important that we accept with some humility that one of the reasons the Chancellor is having to make some unpopular choices is to protect investment in the NHS. 

    This government will always put our public services and our NHS first. But the investment this government is making in the NHS also comes with a moral duty for us as NHS leaders, because every penny that goes into treating the sickness in our society is a penny that could have been spent on tackling the wider social determinants of health, much of which sits outside the NHS. 

    On prevention rather than cure. Of course when I say savings, it sounds very benign. In reality, I do want to take this opportunity to acknowledge that this has been particularly hard for ICBs.  

    I’ve asked a lot of you this year, last year, I said that ICBs will have a more focused purpose, as strategic Commissioners. They’re the drivers of the transformation from a National Health Service to a Neighbourhood Health Service and a preventative health service. 

    Given that focus brief, we’re asking ICBs to downsize significantly.  

    Having seen redundancies in organisations I’ve worked in previously, I want you to know. I do not take this lightly. I know this will have been weighing heavily on all of you and the people who work for you and I certainly don’t want ICB leaders to take the flag for decisions and timetables on head count that are ultimately my responsibility. 

    I’m very alive to the uncertainty that’s hung over staff for far too long. And I don’t mind saying, it’s made me uncomfortable, as it should. Because I know we’re not just talking about jobs, we’re talking about people’s livelihoods. And again that is my responsibility. Not yours. I want to be honest with you and through you to your staff that I have not resolved this quickly enough. 

    But this is worth doing and we can now bring certainty to people. From today I’m giving ICBs the go ahead and the funding for the voluntary redundancy programs that staff have been waiting for. This will see overall head count cut by 50 percent which will particularly, not exclusively, but particularly, affect roles in corporate services, communications and administration. 

    Alongside this, we’re moving ahead with the abolition of NHS England and we’ll complete it to the timetable the Prime Minister announced in March. Head count across my Department and NHS England will also be halved, returning to the size we had in 2010, when the NHS delivered the shortest waiting times and highest patient satisfaction in history. This move will free up more than a billion pounds a year, which will be reinvested in frontline care. 

    To, anyone listening at home. And who knows? Someone might be listening at home. I want to reassure you that our investment is not simply pouring more water into a leaky bucket. We’re plugging the holes cutting out the waste, and rebuilding our National Health Service. And to those of you here today, and hopefully you’re listening. 

    We aren’t simply changing staff numbers. We are ending the constant assurance, ad hoc demands and micromanagement that you’ve been subjected to. The centre will instead enable you to focus on improving services for patients. A new department that empowers rather than suffocates NHS leaders and frontline staff. And I have to say, the way in which leaders across the service are responding to the scale of the challenge I’ve placed on you has been extremely and genuinely impressive.  

    We’ve seen an uptick in flu jabs, among staff and the public, we’ve stress tested plans much earlier, we’re investing in new ambulances, building new urgent treatment centres and introducing new mental health crisis centres. 

    Online access to GP practices should stem the tide of the 4 million patients who go to A&E each year because they can’t get through to their local surgery. So thank you to all of those GPs who have successfully introduced this new system. You’ll be crucial in unclogging emergency departments, freeing up beds and saving lives this winter.  

    And on the social care side, we’re working more closely with local authorities to ensure people get the care and support they need at home rather than languishing in hospital beds. But we know that the NHS is already running hot. A&E and ambulance demand is already higher than it was in 2024. 

    Flu is coming earlier and there is a particularly nasty strain this season. Those are the challenges we have to rise to for many patients, who come through our doors. This winter, it will be the one time in the entire year when they experience the NHS. What impression do we want them to leave with? 

    Do you want to be just about managing? That can’t be our benchmark. We can’t accept the winter crisis as an annual event like the John Lewis Christmas ad. We have to improve year on year. And of course, with all these challenges, the last thing patients need this winter is strike action by the BMA. 

    I was really proud of the way that NHS leaders and frontline staff pulled together to get through the last round of resident doctor strikes.  

    We saw an additional 11,000 procedures going ahead compared with the June 2024 war count. We managed to keep the costs of industrial action, down to the tune of a hundred million pounds less than the previous round. 

    And despite the busiest July on record for A&E, this was the highest proportion of patients seen within four hours in four years. I think that is a considerable achievement. And I want all of you to know that it wasn’t lost on me how hard you all worked to keep the show on the road. 

    But the truth is that strikes do have unavoidable and serious consequences, particularly when they’re called during winter. That is why I made a comprehensive offer to the BMA last week in a final attempt to prevent strike action. Coming on top of a 28.9 percent pay rise which they have already received from this government. 

    I would have thought that the offer to go even further with extra jobs prioritisation and money back in their pockets would have demonstrated how serious this government is about improving resident doctors lives and career prospects. Yet the BMA rejected the offer out of hand, refusing to even put it to their members. 

    If strikes do go ahead, this will cost around £240 million and we will not be able to afford the same offer again, so my message to BMA is simple: postpone the strikes, trust your members and give resident doctors a say. Patients, doctors and the wider NHS staff all lose if strikes go ahead. And there is still time for everyone to win.

    That brings me to a broader point about choices and trade-offs. When we pull together, and when we mobilise behind the ideas in the 10 Year Health Plan, we can deliver year-on-year improvement, change and transformation that gets the NHS back on its feet and fit for the future. Where parts of our team fail to recognise that we can’t solve everything, for everyone, everywhere, all at once, that’s when we run into difficulties.  

    That’s what makes our collective job, much harder. And I know I’m preaching to the choir in this room because as leaders, there are choices and trade-offs that you face every day and it’s really important that we continue to work together to face those choices and trade-offs in an honest way. 

    Because the progress of the last 18 months, tells a bigger story, one of a service beginning to believe in itself again. That’s quite something. Given the horrendous state of neglect the NHS was in after 14 years of under investment and mismanagement. And we have to be honest that some of what we’re doing has never been tried before. Success won’t happen overnight.  

    We, I, will make some mistakes along the way. That is all part of learning and improving. But together we’ve begun restoring confidence, we’ve built strong foundations for real improvements. We’ve moved from barely scraping by to having real hope and big ambitions. 

    I said there’d be fewer targets and less bureaucracy and there are. I said there’d be no more short-termism and we now have multi-year funding settlements to give you the certainty you need. I said the centre would be smaller and it will be. I said the power would be handed back to patients professionals and providers and it is being. All of this is why we’re here today in a position to declare that the NHS is on the road to recovery. 

    And at the heart of that revival is our 10-year plan for health. It sets out how we’ll transform the service of today into an NHS fit for the future. Our three big shifts will create a new model of care that not only catches up with the rest of the pack, but leads the world. 

    The plan breaks with the fiction that you can run a health service, one and a half million staff who deliver 600 million patient interactions every single day, from an office building in Whitehall. The new care model is backed by a new operating model, anchored in clear and consistent principles, power and resources should flow to local providers, frontline staff, and ultimately be placed in the hands of patients.  

    Autonomy should be earned by meeting public expectations delivering, high quality care with excellent financial oversight through world-class leadership. Good performance should be incentivised and rewarded. Poor performance should be held rigorously to account. And transparency and choice are essential, not nice to have. That’s what lay behind our decision to publish new NHS League tables. 

    I know there was a concern when I announced them last year that this would be about naming and shaming and good, old-fashioned, manager bashing. I hope you can see now that this is actually about confronting the challenges we all face with grown-up honesty.  

    I was delighted for example, with the way the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Kings Lynn, a hospital which is literally being propped up on stilts, responded to being bottom of the table.  

    Let me just share with you what the executive managing director, Chris Bown said. He said, and I quote, the issues about our waiting times in our emergency department being too long, our waiting times for cancer care, and elective care being too long, and our financial situation, are not attributed directly to the state of the building. There are things we must do within this building to improve the experience of patients and staff.  

    Now, the reason I highlight that as an example is, he could easily have said it’s all because my hospital’s falling down. 

    And I know he could have said that because I recall offering that defence myself on BBC local radio, in his part of the world earlier that day. And in contrast to what I said, what Chris did was offer the warts and all honesty that is the first step on the road to recovery, not making excuses and covering backsides, but actually taking responsibility and showing a determination to improve. 

    Even when factors are stacked against you, that is how we turn the NHS around. But even as we let go of the top-down approach of the past, we’re not abandoning trusts to their fate. Those at the bottom of the tables will receive more support. At the other end, good performance will be incentivised and rewarded. 

    This new culture of openness drives change and builds confidence that the NHS can learn and improve, which is crucial to restoring people’s faith in the NHS itself.  

    And today I want to talk about the next steps we’re taking on our new operating model. The first step is a real empowerment of primary care and general practice. Already, the hard work and innovation of GPs across the country are helping to renew public confidence in the NHS as the reversal of a decade of declining patient satisfaction shows.  

    And I know it’s not easy. The demands of a 21st century population, the demands of ageing and rising health need have led to unsustainable workloads. We’ve already halved the number of targets in the GP contract and are investing an extra £1.1 billion. But the bright future that general practice deserves will only come through fundamental modernisation. 

    That’s why we’re introducing two new neighbourhood contracts. A single neighbourhood provider contract for the delivery of enhanced services, for patients, through expert, multi-disciplinary teams and a multi-neighbourhood provider contract to lead the Neighbourhood Health Service at scale.

    This is taking the best of the NHS to the rest of the NHS. Learning from some of the trailblazing GP Federations already doing this. Pooling resources and expertise will deliver better services over larger areas, like frailty or end-of-life care, and deliver a more efficient back office so more of GPs time is spent with patients. And as Neighbourhood Health Services reduce demand on acutes, new, financial flows will see savings return to them, helping to accelerate the left shift.  

    I should say at this point, just for the avoidance of doubt, because there might be more media attention on this speech than usual, our second step – reinvent the NHS Foundation Trust model for modern times. Today, we’re launching a new generation of Foundation Trusts called Advanced Foundation Trusts. They will be the front runners towards a more autonomous accountable and integrated NHS. 

    And I can announce that eight trusts are in the running for this new status. They come from across the country from Dorset to Northumbria and they are a mix of acute mental health, and community Trusts. They represent both the best of our NHS and the diversity of NHS. Those who are successful will have demonstrated that they’re delivering on the public’s priorities. High quality care for patients, value for money and progress on the left shift. 

    They’ll be the kind of providers who don’t need the sense of breathing down their neck or trying to micromanage their finances.  

    And they will benefit from real and immediate freedoms, including the ability to reinvest surpluses accumulated last year in future capital projects, more operational, autonomy and fewer ad hoc requests from the centre. 

    We’ll continue to open new freedoms and deliver greater autonomy for Advanced Foundation Trusts in the coming years. And in 10 years time, we want every Trust to have achieved that status. 

    Our third step is the creation of Integrated Healthcare Organisations, or IHOs. Advanced Foundation Trusts will be among the first to take on IHO contracts and hold the whole health budget for a defined population. 

    I’ve heard from so many leaders about how hard it can be to invest in prevention because the savings fall in another part of the system. IHOs will reverse this disincentive, if it makes sense to invest in community care to prevent unnecessary hospital admissions, they’ll be rewarded for doing just that. Any trust can become one, not just the big acutes.
    And so there is no reason, by the way, they couldn’t be led by Primary Care professionals.

    In fact, one of the two trusts currently under consideration for IHO status is a Community Trust. And that diversity will continue. If a nurse is best placed to lead a community service, a GP best place to lead a hospital or an acute Trust best place to lead Neighbourhood Health Services, well then that’s what they’ll do.  

    Because what matters is what delivers for patients. None of this is simply a renaming exercise. However, technocratic it might sometimes appear or even feel. Good system architecture is how we bring to life the vision and ambition in the 10-year plan. 

    I’m offering that as a reminder to myself as much as anyone else. We’re breaking the NHS out of its short-term cycles, annual plans of emergency, bundles of rolling crises, complex rules, unnecessary targets. Instead, our approach is, and will be, if you deliver for patients, if you manage your finances well, if you innovate, then you will have the space to lead.  

    Because plans don’t deliver change people do, and this conference is a reminder that confidence comes from good leadership and that good leadership in the NHS has never mattered more. Great NHS leaders, listen to staff and patients and turn that listening into action. 

    They don’t wait for permission to do the right thing. They don’t require a diktat from NHS, England, their attitude says we can do better, and we will. The difference now is that the system will support you to unleash your entrepreneurialism, creativity and innovation. All this adds up to a very different kind of NHS. 

    It marks a fundamental shift from command and control to collaboration and confidence. And when people feel they are part of a system that learns listens and leads. Confidence returns and confidence is everything. The NHS was built on it, the confidence of a nation that believed in universal healthcare, free at the point of use. The confidence of staff, who knew they were part of something bigger than themselves. What we’re doing together is restoring that confidence. The coming years won’t be a walk in the park. There are no magic wands. No silver bullets. Keeping up momentum will require all of the energy and grit and initiative that’s got us heading in the right direction. 

    We need to up our elective activity, to hit the ambitious targets the Prime Minister set us. To get people seen as quickly as possible in urgent and emergency care and to keep improving access to GPs, and we need to maintain our firm grip on the finances.  

    But for the first time in years, the NHS can look forward with confidence rather than back in frustration, because we’ve got a plan, that’s not just ambitious and realistic. We’ve got a plan that is working and that is why the NHS is on the road to recovery. Thank you very much.

  • Stephen Kinnock – 2025 Speech at RCGP Annual Conference

    Stephen Kinnock – 2025 Speech at RCGP Annual Conference

    The speech made by Stephen Kinnock, the Care Minister, in Newport, Wales on 9 October 2025.

    As the front door to the NHS, it is general practice that is at the coalface of the devastation that poor health causes in the most deprived communities.

    How it leaves children too sick for school, and adults too weak to work.

    How these consequences play out over the course of a lifetime, and how they become entrenched in families generation after generation.

    This is why closing the health gap between the richest and poorest is one of this government’s top priorities.

    Because the fact that a child born in Blackpool will now live 10 years fewer than a child born in Hampshire is utterly shameful.

    I know that the injustice of this postcode lottery piles ever increasing pressure on the GP practices already bearing the brunt of historic underinvestment.

    The college’s own research last year found that in the poorest parts of the country, there are an extra 300 patients per GP, and those of you serving in some of the most deprived parts of England receive less funding compared to practices in better off places.

    This, in the very areas where great healthcare is in the greatest need.

    And so this government is committed to doing better by you and by everyone in our country, not just the wealthy few.

    The Prime Minister promised last week a Britain built for all, and that means no longer leaving grotesque health inequalities unaddressed.

    So I can confirm today that I have formally commissioned a review of the Carr-Hill formula through the National Institute for Health and Care Research.

    This will ensure that resources… [clapping]. Thank you.

    This will ensure that resources are targeted where they are most needed, so that no practice in England is left short changed and no patient is left without care.

    Now, I’ve been in this role long enough now to see the very real difference we can make to people’s lives when we come together to deliver what patients need.

    And my promise to you is that this government does not and never will take your experience and expertise, nor your loyalty to our service, to our health service, and to public service for granted.

    Which is why we hit the ground running from day one [political content removed].

    We invested an additional £1.1 billion into general practice, the biggest increase in over a decade, and funded 2 above-inflation pay increases.

    And in one of our first decisions, Wes Streeting and I reformed the ARRS to provide you with greater flexibility and entrust you with putting together the staff your practices need.

    Part of those changes included an extra £82 million – the first step to hiring an extra 2,000 GPs.

    In fact, we now have the highest number of GPs on record: more than 50,000, of which about almost 40,000 are fully qualified.

    And we’re increasing the number of GP training places in line with the campaign that the RCGP announced today.

    That is a win for practices and a win for patients. We will not accept a situation where GPs can’t get a job and patients can’t see a GP [clapping]. Thank you.

    We also swept away a swathe of meaningless and unnecessary targets, because your time is valuable and should be spent caring for patients, and we will shortly be consulting on legislation that finally recognises and honours GP status, expertise and parity with other specialties.

    Amidst all of this, patient satisfaction in general practice has gone from 61% last year to 75% this year.

    You should be applauding yourself, because that is a credit to all of the hard work that you are putting in.

    It shows that after more than a decade of cuts, we are putting general practice back on the road to recovery. So, thank you all very much.

    Thank you for all that you have done to get us from where we were 14 months ago to where we are today.

    We are moving in the right direction, step by step, and as we fix the foundations, we’re looking forward with a 10 year plan that offers a vision of the truly modern health service that you are crying out for.

    One of the key enablers of our 10 year plan is the move to the Neighbourhood Health Service, which we’re clear will only work with GPs at the heart of it. Just look at the difference that so many of you are already making for patients by taking advantage of the reforms we made to the Advice and Guidance scheme.

    Figures released today show that more than half a million people have now been referred to services like dieticians, physiotherapists and sexual health experts instead of being dumped onto hospital waiting lists.

    For patients, it all adds up to quicker treatment, closer to home. That’s fewer wasted journeys, fewer cancelled appointments and fewer people left in limbo.

    It also frees up hospitals to focus on the most urgent cases. And it stops GP practices seeing the same patients time and time again while they wait for hospital treatment.

    That is what a neighbourhood health service looks like. It is emphatically not about bringing an end to the partnership model, which we absolutely support and where it is working well, it should and it will continue.

    But we’re also creating an option to work over larger geographies, leading to new neighbourhood providers with teams of skilled professionals.

    We will introduce the new neighbourhood contract starting next year and arrangements for the multi-neighbourhood provider will follow.

    We are already making the shift from hospital to community a reality, and I firmly believe that the Neighbourhood Health Service offers a potentially game changing opportunity for GPs to shape the future of care, a future where you’re liberated from the parts of the job that you hate, the form filling and the box ticking, and you can focus on what you came into the profession to do, where you have the tools, the equipment, and the autonomy to provide world class care and where you’d be proud to treat patients in world class facilities. Where you come in for a shift with a sense of purpose, and you go home with a sense of achievement.

    That is the promise that comes with this government.

    An NHS back on its feet and fit for the future.

    And the stakes could not be higher. According to a survey published in the summer, half of millennials in the UK are planning to use private healthcare in the next year.

    Young professionals aged 35 to 44 are increasingly opting for employment with medical insurance. Forget company cars, career progression or holidays. Nowadays, job seekers are lured by fast and easy access to a doctor and routine tests at their convenience.

    That presents an existential threat to the NHS. Because if a generation of patients opt out, they will eventually ask why are they paying so much tax for a service that they no longer use?

    That is the path to 2-tier healthcare, which would widen the health inequalities that we all want to close, and would put the future of the NHS itself at risk by turning it into a poor service for poor people.

    So there is simply no getting away from the fact that we have to move with the times and, in particular, make the shift from analogue to digital.

    And standardising online access and triage is a vitally important element of that shift. It is also key to our manifesto pledges to end the ‘8am scramble’ by widening the window that patients have to request appointments, and to bringing back the family doctor, by in many cases giving patients the option to choose a specific GP when they make that online booking.

    So I am really pleased that as of last financial year, 85% of PCNs said all their practices already had online consultation available for admin and clinical requests, at least for the duration of core hours.

    I saw one for myself just recently: the Grand Union Health Centre in Paddington, while another London surgery reduced waits from 14 days to 3, with 95% of patients seen within a week thanks to the introduction of online facility.

    They, like many practices up and down the country, have really got this cracked and they’re offering a better service to patients as a result of giving them the choice to phone up, walk in or log on.

    But don’t just take my word for it.

    I was delighted to read this week your support for online access, Kamila, while Dr Joe McMannus, a GP and clinical director in Oxfordshire, calls it a game changer for staff and patients.

    Dr Duncan Gooch, chair of the primary care network at the NHS Confederation, said the system can and, I quote, help ensure fair access to advice and treatment, adding that many of our members are operating in this way already and have been positive about the impact.

    Managing demand and providing better access reduces stress on staff, reduces conflict with patients and creates a positive environment where job satisfaction is high, he says.

    I’m sure he speaks for many of you, and I’m grateful to the overwhelming majority who have enthusiastically embraced this move to modernisation.

    Of course, we fully understand that there are practices which, for varying reasons, are struggling to get their systems up and running. For them, we have put in place a mix of tailored support measures available nationally, both online and directly from ICBs.

    These include funding for software, peer to peer support, webinars and hands-on help with workflows, staff training and processes through the General Practice Improvement Programme, which currently has 600 practices taking part.

    All these tools and more are still on offer, so please do take advantage of them if you need to. But ladies and gentlemen, what I simply cannot get my head around and what we will not tolerate is the rump of refuseniks and their cheerleaders and the BMA who are intent on whipping up this issue.

    And I suspect that patients are just as mystified. Here are the facts.

    We negotiated and agreed a contract package in February that included the requirement to have online access available throughout core hours.

    We agreed to delay the implementation by 6 months to give practices time to prepare. We established clear safeguards that mean GPs can divert those with urgent needs to the telephone. And we insisted that surgeries must remain fully accessible by phone and walk in.

    So we are profoundly puzzled as to why this has suddenly blown up as an issue. The BMA claims that GPs are terrified. Really?

    And they say the patients are at risk from an avalanche of online requests that will lead to hospital style waiting lists.

    But neither of these doomsday scenarios have so far materialised.

    Indeed, research recently published in the BMJ examining 10.5 million patient contacts found no evidence of supply-induced demand, with practices able to tailor a care according to need, safely and with fair prioritisation.

    Even the HSSIB notes that significant benefits of using online consultation tools include improved access, reduced telephone call volumes, more effective allocation of clinical time, and improved health and wellbeing.

    So you can imagine how taken aback I was then to read one GP with 20 years’ experience saying, and I quote, the new system feels almost like modern day slavery.

    I mean, come on, we’re asking GPs to allow patients online consultations, and of course, you’re entitled to your views on that and how it might affect your working practices.

    But to suggest that it is akin to being forced into prostitution or coerced to work on a cannabis farm for zero pay and zero control over your life – that is, frankly, too much and going too far.

    We’re always happy to have discussions with the BMA to understand their concerns and to talk about how we can work through them together.

    What we will not do is unpick the contract that we agreed with them in February, nor will we abandon modernisation and turn the NHS into a museum for 20th century healthcare.

    That would be a betrayal of the patients all of us here are fighting for.

    Look, I know that everything in the garden is definitely not rosy. When we said that the NHS was broken, we didn’t just mean for patients.

    General practice in particular is still recovering from years of being underfunded, undervalued and overstretched.

    But as the Secretary of State for Health has said, the NHS is hanging by a thread.

    And instead of pulling on that thread, we should all be pulling in the same direction. We’re clear that the future of the NHS depends on building a health service that values GPs, invests in GPs and supports GPs.

    And so we will uphold our commitment to developing a new contract within this Parliament.

    Ladies and gentlemen, the truth is that for the first time in a very long time, you have a government that is on your side.

    If we are to close the widening gap, expand access to primary care and catapult the NHS into the 21st century, then we need to be on the same side.

    Because restoring the NHS founding promise to provide first class healthcare for everyone, whoever you are, whatever your background and wherever you live, is truly a team effort.

    And only by working together as partners will we pull it off and rescue the NHS from the biggest crisis in its history.

    Thank you very much.