Tag: Rebecca Long-Bailey

  • Rebecca Long Bailey – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Rebecca Long Bailey – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rebecca Long Bailey on 2015-12-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, with reference to paragraph 1.125 of the Spending Review and Autumn Statement 2015, what estimate he has made of the number of single claimants under 35 without dependent children living in social housing who are receiving more than the local housing allowance in housing benefit in (a) total and (b) each local authority.

    Justin Tomlinson

    We estimate that there are approximately 80,000 single claimants under 35 without dependent children living in the social sector who currently receive more than the relevant local housing allowance rate. However, not all claimants in this category will be affected by the announced policy as it will only apply from April 2018, where a new tenancy is taken out or a tenancy is renewed after April 2016.

    Tenants who take on a new tenancy or renew a tenancy will have the opportunity to consider whether they can afford to take on the property before committing to it. As such it is not possible to accurately estimate the proportion of single people without children that will be affected by this policy in 2018.

    As the overall estimate is based on survey data, it is not possible to provide an estimate by Local Authority due to sample size issues.

  • Rebecca Long Bailey – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Rebecca Long Bailey – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rebecca Long Bailey on 2015-12-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 22 October 2015 to Question 11834, whether he still intends to open the consultation on reform of support for those affected by contaminated blood products by the end of this year.

    Jane Ellison

    Reforming the current payment schemes is a priority and we are keen to get this right for those affected.

    We do not have a firm date for the consultation at this time, but it will be announced as soon as possible.

  • Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rebecca Long Bailey on 2016-01-05.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, when the Council of Economic Advisers (a) last met and (b) will next meet.

    Harriett Baldwin

    Members of the Government’s Council of Economic Advisers meet every day to discuss the design and formation of government policy. Details of the Council’s membership and remuneration are available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/special-adviser-data-releases-numbers-and-costs-december-2015. The Council operates from HM Treasury. Running costs cannot be disaggregated from the department’s budget.

  • Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rebecca Long Bailey on 2016-01-28.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will consider including young adult carers in the vulnerable bursary criteria for the 16 to 19 Bursary Fund.

    Mr Sam Gyimah

    The Government recognises the extremely valuable service that young carers provide to their community as well as to their families.

    Additional disadvantage funding is given to schools and colleges through Block 1 and 2 funding to provide extra educational and pastoral support for students whose education has fallen behind for any reason, such as having caring responsibilities.

    The 16 to 19 vulnerable bursary targets specific groups of vulnerable young people whom we know experience financial hardship and we have no plans to change the qualifying criteria.

    The 16 to 19 discretionary bursary is available to support any student who needs financial assistance to stay in education and we will strengthen the guidance provided to the schools and colleges that administer discretionary bursary funds to ensure the needs of young carers are recognised.

  • Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rebecca Long Bailey on 2016-03-01.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he has carried out an equality impact assessment on the draft Tax Credits (Income Threshold and Determination of Rates) Amendment Regulations 2016.

    Harriett Baldwin

    The Government carefully considers all relevant legal obligations – including the equalities duty – when formulating welfare policy.

  • Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rebecca Long Bailey on 2016-03-24.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to page 34 of the report, Overview of Tax Legislation and Rates, published on 16 March 2016, which producers will be exempt from the soft drinks industry levy.

    Mr David Gauke

    The levy will not apply to small operators under a certain volume threshold. We will consult on the level of the threshold and whether and how to apply a tapered relief.

  • Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rebecca Long Bailey on 2016-04-25.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many stakeholders responded to his Department’s informal consultation on the transitional arrangements for the removal of the Climate Change Levy exemption for renewably sourced electricity.

    Damian Hinds

    At Autumn Statement 2015 it was announced that a transitional period for electricity suppliers to apply the Climate Change Levy exemption on renewably-sourced electricity generated before 1 August 2015 would end on 31 March 2018. This followed an informal consultation by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) which received 18 written responses. In addition to these responses, HMRC held a number of meetings with organisations affected by the change.

  • Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rebecca Long Bailey on 2016-05-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what plans she has to develop a bilateral programme of aid for Burundi similar to programmes for Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

    Mr Nick Hurd

    There are no plans for DFID to re-open its bilateral aid programme in Burundi, which closed in 2012 following the 2010 Bilateral Aid Review. However, DFID had continued to provide support to Burundi through Trade Mark East Africa (TMEA), an independent agency promoting trade and regional economic integration, given that this is central to Burundi’s growth and prosperity. DFID has provided £10 million for TMEA work in Burundi since 2012. DFID has also supported Centrally Managed Programmes working in Burundi, covering areas such as food security and livelihoods.

    The UK is responding to the ongoing political crisis, and was the second largest bilateral donor to the regional refugee appeal in 2015, after the US. £21.15 million was committed by DFID for refugee response in the region, including £14.25 million to support refugees in Tanzania and £6.9 million in Rwanda. Allocations for 2016 are currently being finalised, including for support within Burundi.

    Additionally, DFID has provided technical support, in the form of secondment of experts, to support and strengthen the capacity of UN agencies working in Burundi. DFID has deployed a humanitarian adviser to the region in support of the response and to monitor funding provided so far. We continue to work closely with the FCO and international partners to monitor the situation.

  • Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Rebecca Long Bailey – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rebecca Long Bailey on 2016-07-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to increase the number of acute adult psychiatric beds for patients.

    Nicola Blackwood

    The Royal College of Psychiatrists’ Commission on Adult Psychiatric Care – “Old Problems, New Solutions” highlighted a need to develop effective alternatives to inpatient care, rather than to increase the number of acute psychiatric beds.

    We are investing over £400 million up to 2020 in crisis resolution and home treatment teams as a safe alternative to hospital. We invested £33 million in 2014/15 in early intervention in psychosis services and we have introduced waiting times for mental health to improve timely access to treatment, starting with psychological therapies and early intervention in psychosis.

    However, we are clear that increasing effective alternatives must also ensure that a mental health bed is always available if someone needs it.

  • Rebecca Long-Bailey – 2022 Speech on NHS Dentistry in Salford and Eccles

    Rebecca Long-Bailey – 2022 Speech on NHS Dentistry in Salford and Eccles

    The speech made by Rebecca Long-Bailey, the Labour MP for Salford and Eccles, in the House of Commons on 19 December 2022.

    The British Dental Association states that NHS dentistry is facing an existential threat. It says that the threat predates the pandemic, when only enough dentistry for about half the population of England was commissioned. Access to NHS dental services was already very poor in many parts of the country, but access problems have now reached an unprecedented scale, with existing deep inequalities in access and outcomes set to widen. Sadly, nowhere are those access problems more acutely felt than in my constituency of Salford and Eccles. I have been receiving unprecedented levels of casework from people who simply cannot access an NHS dentist.

    One constituent works night shifts on minimum wage. She had required urgent root canal treatment for some time but could not find an NHS dentist and could not even contemplate the cost of a private dentist, so, like millions across the country, she struggled on. The problem is now so severe that her tooth is beyond saving with root canal treatment. She is having to consider having it removed, which she is told will cost her several hundred pounds. She has not got several hundred pounds. She does not know where to turn.

    Another constituent, who is also on a low income, had been trying to find an NHS dentist for over two years. They had two broken teeth and other dental issues that they could not afford to have treated privately, so they called the emergency dentist helpline. The helpline advised them to go for private treatment. Now, at only 21 years of age, my constituent cannot afford any dental treatment at all, and they fear that they will end up losing their teeth.

    Another constituent, who is registered with a disability and who works full-time for the NHS on low pay, tried as far as Rochdale and Oldham but eventually had to pay £250 for a private tooth removal that left her with little money to live on until her next pay cheque.

    To assess the severity of the situation, my office rang every single dental practice listed on the NHS website as falling within my constituency, to inquire if they were accepting new adult NHS patients. Every single one said no, and only two said that they were taking on new NHS child patients. What is worse, when I raised that very issue with the Government back in October 2021, I was informed that they had not made an assessment of the numbers of people refused NHS dental treatment, nor did they hold any waiting list data at all on access to NHS dental services in Salford or Greater Manchester. Not even to be aware of the scale of the problem is, in itself, somewhat staggering.

    As I am sure the Minister is aware, this is not just a Salford problem, but a national one. Researchers for the BBC documentary “Disappearing Dentists”, which aired in August, attempted to call every one of the dental practices in the UK that holds an NHS contract. Of the 26 dental practices with NHS contracts across Salford, 96% were not taking new adult NHS patients, and UK-wide, 90% of practices were not taking new adult NHS patients.

    I must pay full credit to the local staff and teams across Salford: all the dentists, hygienists, therapists, nurses and administrators, and the Greater Manchester integrated care partnership’s dental commissioning team. They are giving their absolute best in incredibly difficult circumstances. However, our dental services are under unprecedented strain.

    I would be grateful if the Minister addressed the following issues in his response. First, there has been chronic underfunding of NHS dental services. In real terms, net Government spend on general dental practice in England was cut by over a quarter between 2010 and 2020. It is also important to note that England invests significantly less in dental services per head of population than other parts of the UK. For example, before the pandemic Government spend on NHS dentistry per capita was £37 in England, compared with £49 in Wales, £56 in Northern Ireland and £59 in Scotland. The Minister might respond by saying that in January the Government pledged £50 million for a “dentistry treatment blitz”. However, that was a time-limited, one-off injection of funding which had very modest take-up, as practices were so overstretched in trying to hit unrealistic activity targets that they struggled to find any additional capacity. The British Dental Association estimates that it would take £1.5 billion a year just to restore dental budgets to their 2010 levels. I hope that the Minister will agree to take back a proposal to his Department for the ringfencing of long-term funding on that scale.

    Secondly, the current target-based NHS dental contract is causing serious problems in the recruitment and retention of staff. The British Dental Association says that we are facing an “exodus” of dentists from the service: 75% of dentists surveyed are thinking of reducing their NHS commitments next year alone. Central to this is not only the issue of chronic underfunding that I have already mentioned, but the current discredited target-based dental contract that was imposed on the profession in 2006 and was widely considered unsustainable and unfit for purpose even before the pandemic. Indeed, in 2010 both Labour and the Conservatives committed to amending the contract. It sets restrictions on the number of NHS patients that a dentist can see, and it punishes dentists for taking on new patients with high needs.

    The Minister may, of course, refer to a package of marginal changes that the Government introduced in November, including dentists’ updating a “find a dentist” website regularly with details of the availability of appointments, a higher reward for treating three or more teeth, and a new payment rate for complex treatment. While those are of course welcome changes, sadly there is little point in setting up a “find a dentist” website for appointments when the Government know that no appointments are actually available.

    Furthermore, the British Dental Association states that the changes will do little to arrest the exodus of dentists from the service or to address the crisis in patient access, given that they have been introduced with no additional funding. With that in mind, I would be grateful if the Minister told me when formal negotiations on fundamental long-term reform of the dental contract are due to begin.

    A constituent contacted me to express concern about the Government’s plan to go ahead with proposed changes pursuant to the recent consultation on changes to the General Dental Council’s international registration legislation despite the large number of respondents who have raised issues relating to the proposal. I hope that the Minister will take those concerns on board, and will agree to review it.

    Thirdly, let me stress to the Minister that NHS dentistry must cease to be treated as an afterthought in healthcare policymaking. Changes in primary care commissioning in the Health and Care Act 2022 must not lead to further cuts, and dental services must be represented adequately in the governance structures of the new integrated care systems.

    Let me finally point out that prevention is key, but has lost its way somewhat in recent years. The Government must undertake to build on historical commitments to prevention, in parallel with support for dental services. That must include supervised brushing in early years settings, dedicated funding for new water fluoridation schemes, and measures to reduce sugar consumption.

    I hope that the Minister has listened to the concerns I have raised and will address each point in turn, rather than reiterating previous Government responses on what they have done so far. What the Government have done so far clearly is not working. If my constituents cannot get access to an NHS dentist across Salford and Eccles, something needs to change urgently. Access to dental treatment should be a right, not a luxury.

    As I set out at the start, NHS dentistry faces an existential threat. My constituents are not receiving the access to care that they deserve. It is clear that urgent action is required. Finally, let me take this opportunity to wish you, Madam Deputy Speaker, a fantastic Christmas and a happy New Year, and the same to the Minister and all staff in the House.