Category: Speeches

  • Ian Blackford – 2022 Comments on Stephen Flynn Becoming SNP Leader at Westminster

    Ian Blackford – 2022 Comments on Stephen Flynn Becoming SNP Leader at Westminster

    The comments made by Ian Blackford, the outgoing SNP Leader at Westminster, on Twitter on 6 December 2022.

    Congratulations to Stephen Flynn on being elected the SNP Westminster leader. I look forward to supporting Stephen as he takes on the responsibility of taking the group forward as we work to deliver independence.

  • Stephen Flynn – 2022 Comments on Becoming SNP Leader at Westminster

    Stephen Flynn – 2022 Comments on Becoming SNP Leader at Westminster

    The comments made by Stephen Flynn, the SNP MP for Aberdeen South, on Twitter on 6 December 2022.

    A massive thank you to everyone for their kind messages, to Ian [Blackford] and Kirsten [Oswald] for the example they have set and also to Alison and Stuart – two of the most talented and compassionate people I’ve the good fortune to know.

    Now, time to deliver ???????!

  • Nicola Sturgeon – 2022 Comments on Stephen Flynn Becoming SNP’s Leader at Westminster

    Nicola Sturgeon – 2022 Comments on Stephen Flynn Becoming SNP’s Leader at Westminster

    The comments made by Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish First Minister and Leader of the SNP, on 6 December 2022.

    Congratulations to new SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn and deputy leader Mhairi Black – a truly formidable team. Looking forward to working with them both.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2022 Parliamentary Question on GP Recruitment

    Ruth Cadbury – 2022 Parliamentary Question on GP Recruitment

    The parliamentary question asked by Ruth Cadbury, the Labour MP for Brentford and Isleworth, in the House of Commons on 6 December 2022.

    Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)

    What progress his Department has made on its commitment to recruit 6,000 additional GPs by 2024.

    The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Steve Barclay)

    In September 2022 there were nearly 2,300 more full-time equivalent doctors in general practice than there were at the same time in 2019, and more than 9,000 GP trainees.

    Ruth Cadbury

    A constituent of mine, a full-time GP in her 50s, told me that the pension rules mean she has to retire, work part-time or emigrate, which is hardly likely to help her patients to obtain appointments with her. Having hinted at a change in doctors’ pension rules last summer, the Government are only now announcing a consultation that will last until next spring, so there will be no change in these crazy rules until next summer at the earliest. Is this not too little, too late?

    Steve Barclay

    It is worth reminding the House that there are 3% more doctors this year than last year. As I have said, we have 2,300 more full-time GPs, and we are recruiting more. However, the hon. Lady is absolutely right about doctors’ pensions; that is a material issue, which is why we launched the consultation, and we are working with Treasury colleagues to address these concerns as quickly as possible.

  • Jim Shannon – 2022 Parliamentary Question on the Government’s 10-Year Cancer Plan

    Jim Shannon – 2022 Parliamentary Question on the Government’s 10-Year Cancer Plan

    The parliamentary question asked by Jim Shannon, the DUP MP for Strangford, in the House of Commons on 6 December 2022.

    Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)

    When his Department will publish the 10-year cancer plan.

    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Maria Caulfield)

    Earlier this year, we held a successful call for evidence on a new cancer plan, which received 5,000 responses. We are now considering those responses and how we can best support the diagnosis and treatment of cancer patients. I will be in a position to update the House shortly.

    Jim Shannon

    I thank the Minister for her response, but it has been five months since July, when the 10-year cancer plan was due to be published, and 10 months since February, when the war on cancer was announced. While the Government have delayed, cancer patients have faced unacceptable waiting times for diagnosis and treatment. Performance over the past five months has been the worst on record against the target of a 62-day wait between the GP referral for suspected cancer and the first treatment. I ask the Minister respectfully: does she agree that we in this House and the people of this country now need a long-term, ambitious plan to reduce waits and ensure that cancer patients in this country have the best outcomes possible? Will she set out a timeline—not just say “shortly”—for delivering such a plan?

    Maria Caulfield

    As the hon. Gentleman knows, I cannot comment on what is happening in Northern Ireland, because health is a devolved matter. I can only update him on what is happening in England. We are not waiting for a cancer plan to start on the backlogs: that is why this Government are investing £8 billion over three years to clear the elective backlog. We are seeing record numbers of patients. Cancer treatments continued throughout the pandemic, but we are seeing a higher number coming through than usual. Despite the increase of more than 129% in patients getting urgent GP referrals since September 2019, 91% of patients in England are receiving their treatment within 31 days of the decision to treat, compared with just 87% of patients in Northern Ireland in June. We are very committed to reducing cancer waiting times. I suggest that the hon. Gentleman may wish to speak to the Minister in Northern Ireland as well.

    Maggie Throup (Erewash) (Con)

    Diagnostic activity, whether in vivo or in vitro, forms part of more than 85% of clinical pathways. Will my hon. Friend confirm that it will receive due recognition in the 10-year cancer strategy?

    Maria Caulfield

    May I thank my hon. Friend for all her hard work during her time as a Health Minister? We are going through the responses to the call for evidence right now; as I have indicated, we will update the House shortly. I will very much take her points on board.

  • Andrew Lewer – 2022 Parliamentary Question on the Social Care Workforce

    Andrew Lewer – 2022 Parliamentary Question on the Social Care Workforce

    The parliamentary question asked by Andrew Lewer, the Conservative MP for Northampton South, in the House of Commons on 6 December 2022.

    Andrew Lewer (Northampton South) (Con)

    What steps his Department is taking to increase the size of the social care workforce.

    The Minister of State, Department of Health and Social Care (Helen Whately)

    I thank all those who work in social care for what they do day in, day out for people whose lives depend on care. We are supporting care homes and agencies in their efforts to recruit staff, including with a substantial national recruitment campaign. In fact, colleagues may have seen some of the adverts while watching popular programmes such as “I’m a Celebrity”. We have also added social care workers to the shortage occupation list, so that social care can benefit from international recruitment to increase the workforce in the short term.

    Andrew Lewer

    A recent report from the Motor Neurone Disease Association, outlined at the all-party group on motor neurone disease, which I chair, found that most unpaid MND carers provide more than 75 hours of care a week, but many are unable to access respite services due to the lack of adequately skilled care workers equipped to care for the complexity of MND sufferers’ needs. Will the Minister commit to increasing specialised training for conditions such as MND in the social care workforce to protect carers’ health and wellbeing?

    Helen Whately

    My hon. Friend makes an important point. I, too, have heard from family carers about the difficulties that they have faced in getting skilled professional help, which, in turn, gives them support and respite. At the moment, we provide £11 million annually for a workforce development fund, which social care employers can access to help to pay for staff training. Looking ahead, we are working on social care workforce reforms, of which training and skills will form a substantial part. I commit to looking into his suggestion that specialist training for MND care should be part of that.

  • Andrew Murrison – 2022 Comments on the Death of Private Josh Kennington

    Andrew Murrison – 2022 Comments on the Death of Private Josh Kennington

    The comments made by Andrew Murrison, the Minister of State at the MOD, on 6 December 2022.

    It is with deep sadness that I learnt of the death of Private Josh Kennington of 5 Medical Regiment, Royal Logistic Corps. He displayed a natural aptitude for soldiering and it’s clear from his colleagues that he was admired and respected by all those he served with, irrespective of their rank. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and loved ones at this difficult time.

  • Stephanie Peacock – 2022 Parliamentary Question on Waiting Times for Neurological Diagnosis and Treatment

    Stephanie Peacock – 2022 Parliamentary Question on Waiting Times for Neurological Diagnosis and Treatment

    The parliamentary question asked by Stephanie Peacock, the Labour MP for Barnsley East, in the House of Commons on 6 December 2022.

    Stephanie Peacock (Barnsley East) (Lab)

    What recent steps his Department has taken to reduce waiting times for neurological diagnosis and treatment.

    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Maria Caulfield)

    Reducing waiting times for diagnostics and treatment is a priority for this Government. The delivery plan for tackling the elective backlog sets out steps to recover and transform out-patient services across all specialisms, including neurology.

    Stephanie Peacock

    In March 2021, my constituent suffered a severe head injury. By the time they have their first neurology appointment in January 2023, they will have waited nearly two years for treatment. In the meantime, they have been unable to work, been rejected for disability benefits and are in severe pain. Does the Minister accept that this wait is unacceptable, and will she outline what support the Department is making available for those who are suffering while they wait for vital appointments?

    Maria Caulfield

    I thank the hon. Lady. I know she raised her constituent’s case in a Westminster Hall debate on 22 November and my understanding is that they now have an appointment for January, but there is absolutely a backlog from covid patients. We know that. That is why we are putting in over £8 billion in the next three years to deal with that backlog. That is in addition to the £2 billion we have already provided through the elective recovery fund. We have already virtually eliminated the two-year wait and we are now on track, by April, to eliminate waits of 18 months or more.

  • Andy Carter – 2022 Parliamentary Question on Hospital Bed Capacity

    Andy Carter – 2022 Parliamentary Question on Hospital Bed Capacity

    The parliamentary question asked by Andy Carter, the Conservative MP for Warrington South, in the House of Commons on 6 December 2022.

    Andy Carter (Warrington South) (Con)

    What steps his Department is taking to increase hospital bed capacity.

    The Minister of State, Department of Health and Social Care (Will Quince)

    To support operational resilience, the NHS has set out plans to increase hospital bed capacity by the equivalent of at least 7,000 general and acute beds during the winter. That is alongside £500 million of funding to support quick, safe discharge from hospital and free up capacity, and £1.5 billion of targeted investment funding for new surgical hubs, increasing bed capacity and equipment for elective care recovery.

    Andy Carter

    I am grateful for the Minister’s response. Over the last 20 years, Warrington has had among the highest level of new houses built in the north-west of England, but our healthcare infrastructure has not kept pace. We desperately need a new hospital. Our accident and emergency is at breaking point, we do not have enough beds and there is nowhere for those visiting to park their cars. In 2021, my NHS trust submitted a bid to the Department of Health and Social Care for a new hospital. Will he update us on where we are with that process?

    Will Quince

    I thank my hon. Friend, who has been a long-standing advocate for a new general hospital for Warrington. The expression of interest from the trust has been received. We are currently in the process of reviewing expressions of interest for the eight new hospitals and aim to announce a final decision by the end of the year. I recently met him to hear about the plans, and the people of Warrington could not have a greater champion than him.

  • Neil O’Brien – 2022 Speech on Government Handling of PPE Contracts

    Neil O’Brien – 2022 Speech on Government Handling of PPE Contracts

    The speech made by Neil O’Brien, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, in the House of Commons on 6 December 2022.

    To make sure that I get to them, I want to respond to some of the important points made by Back-Bench Members at the start of my remarks. The hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull East (Karl Turner), who is sadly no longer in his place, mentioned Arco not getting a contract. My understanding is that it did get a contract, so we should resolve what is correct.

    The hon. Member for Argyll and Bute (Brendan O’Hara) mentioned the two different contracts for PPE Medpro, and it is important to be clear that one of those contracts was delivered—the PPE was delivered and that was fine—and one did not, and that is the one we are taking enforcement action on. With all these contracts, we are just as keen as everybody else to make sure that we get good value for money for taxpayers and we enforce whenever things have not been delivered.

    The hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Nick Smith) called for the publication of details of companies that were in the high-priority group and then got contracts, which is something that happened in November 2021. I slightly disagree with one point that the hon. Member for Bradford West (Naz Shah) made: the argument that we should not have had any contracts with firms that had not previously been PPE suppliers. Of course lots of new firms were coming into the market, and part of our drive to get more UK supply relied on that very point.

    Nick Smith rose—

    Neil O’Brien

    I am just going to complete my tour of people’s contributions.

    The hon. Member for Brent Central (Dawn Butler) said that we should donate and reuse PPE, and I am pleased to tell her that that is precisely what we are doing. The hon. Member for Edinburgh West (Christine Jardine) said that we are in the middle of a major cost of living issue, and she is absolutely correct. That is why we are spending £55 billion on energy support, why we have the £900 payment for 8 million poorer households and why we are raising the national living wage to a record level—that is worth about £1,600 for a full-time worker.

    The hon. Members for Blackburn (Kate Hollern) and for Llanelli (Dame Nia Griffith)—

    Several hon. Members rose—

    Neil O’Brien

    I will give way, but I am trying to respond to everyone’s points first. If Members can hold on, we will get there.

    As I was saying, those two Members both made the point that we wanted to get more UK producers making PPE. The Minister of State, Department of Health and Social Care, my hon. Friend the Member for Colchester (Will Quince), has already made the point that we have gone from 1% of FFP3 masks being made in the UK to 75%. I should also mention our work with Moderna to get more development and production of vaccines happening in the UK as part of that exciting deal.

    The hon. Member for Glenrothes (Peter Grant) said that one potential supplier had been incandescent with rage because they did not get a contract. That is the system working. People were being turned down for contracts; 90% of those who went through the—[Laughter.] Madam Deputy Speaker, I am desperately trying to respond to all the points. [Interruption.]

    Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)

    Order. Give the Minister a chance to respond to all the questions. I have tried to give enough time for that, so let him get on with it.

    Neil O’Brien

    Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am keen to reply to them. The hon. Gentleman said that only 3%—

    Peter Grant rose—

    Neil O’Brien

    I am literally responding to the hon. Gentleman. He talked about only 3% not being reusable and implied that some of the other things were only fit for servicing a car. To be clear, some of these things have a different clinical use. For example, the NHS tends to use and wants to use aprons on a roll when there is the choice, where we have a normal PPE market. What we do therefore is use the flat-pack ones that we had and donate them to care homes. Self-assembly visors are not preferred in the NHS because they take a bit of time to assemble, so we give them to dentists and the like.

    We have heard two different uses of the words “writing off” in this debate, and it is important to be clear about the difference between these two things. Some people talk about “writing off” for things that are not usable, and only 3% of what was purchased is in that category. Then there is a different accounting use of “writing off”, which is something we have to do; we bought a load of PPE because we needed it in the middle of the pandemic and it was more expensive at that time—it was worth more then than it is now. That is the accounting meaning of “writing off”. Let us be clear about those two different uses.

    Several hon. Members rose—

    Neil O’Brien

    There are so many questions that I do not know who to give way to, but I think I should start with the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent.

    Nick Smith

    I thank the Minister for giving way. He attributed comments to me that I did not make, and I just want to put that on the record. I do have a question for him: does he accept that excessive profits have been made on the back of some of these PPE contracts?

    Neil O’Brien

    I am about to explain the due process that we went through and the incredibly forensic work that our civil servants did. Just to be clear—again, for the benefit of the House—Ministers did not make decisions on contracts. Officials, as usual, made the decisions on contracts. I will talk more about the process that we went through in the very short time that we have remaining.

    During the dark days of the pandemic, we had a collective approach that saw hundreds of millions of life-saving vaccine doses delivered, the largest testing infrastructure in Europe established from a standing start and the distribution of tens of millions of items of PPE. It was a uniquely complex challenge even in normal times, but a particular challenge when the entire world was trying to get these goods. [Interruption.] Opposition Members might want to have the courtesy to listen to the answers of the questions that they have asked—a strange approach.

    We delivered 20 billion items to the frontline and to our broader workforce—we are still in fact delivering 5 million items a months. That was enough to deliver a response to a worst-case scenario, which, fortunately, did not emerge. That is why we have that 20% excess stock that I mentioned earlier. It is simply not the case, as one hon. Member mentioned, that we had five times too much PPE. However, let us remember the context. It was the former Leader of the Opposition, the right hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn), who said that it was a “matter of safety” and of patients’ safety. We agreed, which is why we acted. It was the shadow Health Secretary who said:

    “Our NHS and social care staff deserve the very best protective clothing…and they urgently need…it.”

    We agreed. It was the current shadow Chancellor who called for a

    “national effort which leaves no stone unturned”.

    That is exactly what we did. [Interruption.]

    Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)

    Stop shouting!

    Neil O’Brien

    What did the hon. Member for Brent Central say there? [Interruption.] No, she does not want to repeat it.

    Let me be clear, Madam Deputy Speaker: at every point in the procurement process, the process is rightly run by our brilliant commercial professionals. Ministers are not involved in the procurement process; Ministers are not involved in the value of contracts. Ministers are not involved in the scope of contracts, and Ministers are not involved in the length of contracts. That is something echoed by the National Audit Office, whose report concluded that the Ministers had properly declared their interests and that there was

    “no evidence of their involvement in procurement decisions or contract management”.

    The role of Ministers was exactly what we would expect. Approaches from suppliers were passed on to civil servants for an independent assessment. Let us again look at the scale of the effort: 19,000 companies made offers, around 430 were processed through the high-priority group, and only 12% of those resulted in a contract for 51 firms. That group was primarily about managing the many, many requests that were coming in to Ministers from people across the House and from people across the country who were desperate to help with that national challenge of getting more PPE, and there had to be a way of dealing with them. To be clear, due diligence was carried out on every single company, financial accountability sat with a senior civil servant, all procurement decisions were taken by civil servants, and a team of more than 400 civil servants processed referrals and undertook due diligence checks. It was a huge operation run by the civil service, and I thank them for their work in getting our NHS the PPE that it needed.

    Let me be clear, I will not stand here and say that there are not any lessons to be learned; of course there are. But we should be clear about what those lessons are. Despite the global race to get PPE, only 3% of the materials sourced were fit for purpose, but we have built more resilient supply chains. We are implementing the recommendations of the Boardman review of pandemic procurement in full. I have mentioned the growth of UK procurement of face masks and of vaccines.

    In closing, I wish to thank all of those who have been involved in this important conversation. We should be rightly proud of what was achieved during those dark and difficult days at the start of the pandemic, operating in conditions of considerable uncertainty. We were in a situation where, literally, there was gazumping going on. If people did not turn up with the cash, things were removed that they had bought from the warehouses. That was the global race that we were in to source these things. The 400-strong team of civil servants who led this process did a remarkable job from a standing start of sourcing the goods that we needed.

    During this debate, we have heard a number of deliberate obfuscations of the different things that Ministers and officials do. To be clear, all of these decisions went through an eight-stage forensic process that was run entirely by officials and it did not get anyone a contract to go into this high-priority group. It was simply about managing the sheer number of bids for contracts that were coming in to people across this House. At the time, although memories are very short and the barracking on this continued—

    Sir Alan Campbell (Tynemouth) (Lab) claimed to move the closure (Standing Order No. 36).

    Question put forthwith, That the Question be now put.

    Question agreed to.

    Main Question accordingly put and agreed to.