Tag: Wes Streeting

  • Wes Streeting – 2023 Speech to Labour Party Conference

    Wes Streeting – 2023 Speech to Labour Party Conference

    The speech made by Wes Streeting, the Shadow Health Secretary, in Liverpool on 11 October 2023.

    Nathaniel, it is truly an honour to have you with us here in Liverpool.

    When you came to see me in my advice surgery that Friday afternoon, I was moved by your spirit and your courage.

    Your determination to follow your great passions of music and education in the face of your terrible diagnosis blew me away.

    But I also felt a deep sense of injustice that I feel now.

    The injustice that the NHS didn’t reach you in time.

    The injustice that delay meant the difference between life and death.

    As a cancer survivor, it shakes me to my core.

    I owe my life to the NHS because it was there for me when I needed it.

    Not many people find themselves in a position to repay that kind of debt to the NHS.

    But I can.

    And I am determined to make sure that the NHS doesn’t fail people like Nathaniel anymore.

    It starts with gripping the crisis in front of us.

    7.7 million people waiting.

    The longest waiting lists ever.

    And the audacity of the fifth Conservative Prime Minister in 13 years blaming NHS staff for the Tories’ abysmal failure.

    Rishi Sunak – how dare you?

    There is a window of opportunity for negotiations before the next round of strikes takes place.

    A serious Prime Minister would take it.

    But this is his government in a nutshell

    – problems are there to be exploited, rather than solved.

    Meanwhile, patients are left waiting.

    That’s why a Labour government will take immediate action to cut waiting lists.

    We’ll provide an extra £1.1bn to help the NHS beat the backlog, with extra clinics at evenings and weekends

    – providing two million more appointments each year.

    Faster treatment for patients.

    Extra pay for staff.

    The first step to cut waiting lists and beat the Tory backlog.

    Paid for by abolishing the non-dom tax status, because patients need treatment more than the wealthiest need a tax break.

    We’ve also got to deal with the immediate crisis in NHS dentistry.

    Things are so bad that the number one cause of hospital admissions among children is tooth decay.

    People are pulling their own teeth out with pliers because they can’t get an NHS dentist.

    This is Dickensian.

    DIY dentistry.

    In 21st century Britain.

    That’s why Labour will deliver 700,000 extra appointments each year, get more dentists into the communities that need them most, and make sure that everyone who needs an NHS dentist can get one.

    But tackling the immediate crisis isn’t enough.

    It’s our mission to get the NHS back on its feet and fit for the future.

    Achieving our mission will take time, investment, and reform.

    Reform is even more important than investment.

    Because pouring ever-increasing amounts of money into a system that isn’t working is wasteful in every sense.

    A waste of money we don’t have.

    A waste of time that is running out.

    A waste of potential, because the NHS has so much going for it.

    Labour will never abandon the founding principles of the NHS as a publicly funded public service, free at the point of use.

    I make the case for reform not in opposition to those principles but in defence of them.

    I’m blunt about the fact that the NHS is no longer the envy of the world, not to undermine it, but to reassure people that we’ve noticed.

    I argue that our NHS must modernise or die, not as a threat but a choice.

    The crisis really is that existential.

    When I look at leading health systems across the world, the fundamental problem with the NHS becomes obvious.

    We have an NHS that gets to people too late.

    A hospital-based system geared towards late diagnosis and treatment, delivering poorer outcomes at greater cost.

    An analogue system in a digital age.

    A sickness service, not a health service.

    With too many lives hampered by preventable illness.

    And too many lives lost to the biggest killers.

    So be in no doubt about the scale of the challenge.

    Not just because as waiting lists rise, public confidence falls.

    But because in the longer term the challenge of rising chronic disease, combined with our ageing society, threatens to bankrupt the NHS.

    The Tories answer is all sticking plasters in the short term but an abandonment of the NHS in the longer term.

    As we saw in Manchester last week, the Conservative Party dances to the tune of Nigel Farage now.

    And the more they move to the right, the greater their threat to our NHS becomes.

    So it falls to us, the Party that founded the NHS 75 years ago, to rescue, rebuild and renew the health service today.

    Labour’s reform agenda will turn the NHS on its head.

    – From hospital to community.

    – Analogue to digital.

    – Sickness to prevention.

    A neighbourhood health service as much as a National Health Service, pioneering cutting edge treatment and technology, preventing ill-health, not just treating it.

    And what gives me hope are the people working with and for the NHS today, who are leading the way to that better future.

    There is nothing wrong with the NHS that can’t be cured by what’s right with the NHS.

    In Sussex, GPs work together providing specialist and urgent care in the community, allowing patients to see their regular family doctor, and giving them greater control over their own care.

    They’re preventing 4,000 patients from having to go to hospital every year.

    Primary care will be at the heart of Labour’s plan for the NHS – we’ll train thousands more GPs and cut the red tape that ties up their time.

    Labour will bring back the family doctor.

    Faced with the appalling effects of the pandemic on children’s mental health, schools in Bury are working with the NHS to deliver support.

    The number of children requiring mental health services has been cut in half.

    Every child struggling with their mental health should get the help they need.

    Labour will put mental health support in every school and hubs in every community, paid for by abolishing tax breaks for private schools.

    Politics is about choices. Labour chooses to give every child the best start in life, not just the privileged few.

    There is no solution to the crisis in the NHS that doesn’t include a plan for social care.

    We will grip the immediate crisis in social care, starting with the workforce, and I’ll have the best ally I could hope for

    – the former care worker turned Deputy Prime Minister, Angela Rayner.

    Together, Ange and I will deliver a New Deal for Care Workers.

    A workforce plan to address recruitment and retention, the professional status these remarkable people deserve, and the first ever Fair Pay Agreement for care professionals.

    The first step on our ten-year plan for a National Care Service.

    One of the biggest opportunities we have is the revolution taking place in medical science and technology.

    That revolution is happening here in Britain.

    We’re a world leader in life sciences.

    Home to some of the smartest tech entrepreneurs.

    Take Moorfields Eye Hospital, where artificial intelligence identifies signs of disease on scans, with an accuracy equal to world-leading experts.

    They spot conditions earlier and prioritise patients with the most serious diseases before irreversible damage sets in.

    The next Labour government will arm the NHS with state-of-the-art equipment and new technology to cut waiting times Our ‘Fit For The Future Fund’ will double the number of scanners in the NHS, so patients are diagnosed earlier, and treated faster.

    More than that – breakthroughs in genomics and AI mean that we’ll soon be able to predict and prevent illness in the first place.

    If we combine the care of the NHS, with the ingenuity of our country’s leading scientific minds, the NHS could once again be the envy of the world.

    At the heart of Keir’s mission driven approach is this idea:

    Transformation of the National Health Service must go hand in hand with a transformation of the health of the nation.

    A child born in Britain today should live to see the 22nd century.

    I want them to be part of the healthiest generation that ever lived.

    That’s Labour’s ambition for children.

    And we will bring it to life by taking tough action against those who are cutting our children’s lives short.

    We will ban junk food ads targeted at children.

    Bridget’s breakfast clubs will provide every primary school pupil with a healthy, nutritious start to the day, making sure they have hungry minds, not hungry bellies.

    We’ll introduce supervised toothbrushing to keep kids’ teeth clean and keep them out of hospital.

    And to those in the vaping industry, who have sought to addict a generation of children to nicotine with flavours like rainbow burst and cotton candy ice, you have been warned,

    – a Labour government will come down on you like a ton of bricks.

    Back in January, I proposed going even further by outlawing the sale of cigarettes to the next generation altogether.

    Tory MPs said it was “nanny state”,

    “an attack on ordinary people and their culture”,

    They accused me of “health fascism”.

    Unfortunately for them,

    Labour is winning the battle of ideas, and where Labour leads Rishi Sunak follows.

    We’ll vote through the ban on selling cigarettes to kids, so that young people are even less likely to smoke than they are to vote Tory.

    Conference, those are just the first steps of what is needed.

    Our reforms will be fundamental and deep.

    They have to be if the NHS is to be there for us in the next 75 years, as it has in the last 75 years.

    The choice at the general election is clear.

    We can see the future with the Tories unfolding before our eyes.

    A two-tier health service, where those who can afford it go private and those who can’t are left behind.

    Our NHS reduced to a poor service for poor people.

    Our country viewed as the sick man of Europe.

    Labour has a different vision for our future.

    Where no one fears ill-health or old age.

    Where people have power, choice and control over their own health and care.

    Where the place you’re born or the wealth you’re born into don’t determine how long you’ll live.

    Where patients benefit from the brightest minds developing cutting edge treatments.

    And where children born in Britain today become the healthiest generation that ever lived.

    That’s Labour’s ambition for our country.

    To those who say that we’re all the same and that voting never changes anything, tell them:

    13 years of Conservative government have delivered the longest waiting lists and lowest patient satisfaction on record.

    13 years of Labour government delivered the shortest waiting times and the highest patient satisfaction in history.

    That’s the Labour difference.

    And when they ask what does Labour stand for, tell them:

    Two million more appointments a year to cut waiting lists.

    700,000 more appointments with NHS dentists.

    Mental health support in every school.

    Mental health hubs in every community.

    Double the number of scanners.

    The biggest expansion of NHS staff in history.

    More doctors, more nurses, more midwives.

    An NHS that’s there for you when you need it.

    Back on its feet and fit for the future.

    So let’s go out there and give Britain its hope back.

    Let’s give Britain its NHS back.

    Together, with Keir, let’s give Britain its future back.

  • Wes Streeting – 2023 Speech on the Countess of Chester Hospital Inquiry

    Wes Streeting – 2023 Speech on the Countess of Chester Hospital Inquiry

    The speech made by Wes Streeting, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, in the House of Commons on 4 September 2023.

    I strongly echo the sentiments of the Secretary of State and thank him for advance sight of his statement. I welcome the appointment of Lady Justice Thirlwall to lead the inquiry into the crimes committed by Lucy Letby, and I strongly welcome his appointment today of Baroness Lampard to lead the statutory review in Essex. I look forward to receiving further updates from the Secretary of State as soon as possible.

    Turning to the case of Lucy Letby, there are simply no words to describe the evil of the crimes that she committed. They are impossible to fathom. Although she has now been convicted and sentenced to a whole-life order, the truth is that no punishment could possibly fit the severity of the crimes she committed. With Cheshire police’s investigation having expanded to cover her entire clinical career, we may not yet know the extent of her crimes. What we do know is that her victims should be starting a new school term today. Our thoughts are with the families who have suffered the worst of traumas, whose pain and suffering we could not possibly imagine, and who will never forget the children cruelly taken from them. We hope that the sentencing helped to bring them some closure, even though the cowardly killer dared not face them in court.

    I wish to pay tribute to the heroes of this story: the doctors who fought to sound the alarm in the face of hard-headed, stubborn refusal. This murderer should have been stopped months before she was finally suspended. Were it not for the persistent courage of the staff who finally forced the hospital to call in Cheshire police, more babies would have been put at risk. I am sure the whole House will want to join me in recognising Dr Stephen Brearey and Dr Ravi Jayaram, whose bravery has almost certainly saved lives.

    Blowing the whistle on wrongdoing is never easy, which is why it should not be taken lightly. Indeed, we can judge the health of an institution by the way that it treats its whistleblowers. The refusal to listen, to approach the unexplained deaths of infants with an open mind and to properly investigate the matter when the evidence appeared to be so clear is simply unforgivable. The insult of ordering concerned medics to write letters of apology to this serial killer demonstrates the total lack of seriousness with which their allegations were treated.

    I welcome the fact that the Secretary of State has changed the terms of the inquiry and put it on a statutory footing. There must be no hiding place for those responsible for such serious shortcomings. It is welcome that the inquiry will have the full force of the law behind it, as it seeks to paint the full picture of what went wrong at the Countess of Chester Hospital, and it is right that the wishes of the families affected have been listened to. I welcome the fact that they will be involved in the drawing up of the terms of reference.

    I ask the Secretary of State, people right across Government and people who hope to be in government to make sure that, in future, in awful cases such as this, families and victims are consulted at the outset. Can he assure the House that the families will continue to be involved in decisions as the inquiry undertakes its work?

    Mr Speaker, no stone can be left unturned in the search for the lessons that must be learned, but it is already clear that there were deep issues with the culture and leadership at the Countess of Chester Hospital. This is not the first time that whistleblowers working in the NHS have been ignored, when listening to their warnings could have saved lives. Despite several reviews, there is no one who thinks that the system of accountability, of professional standards and of regulation of NHS managers and leaders is good enough.

    Why were senior leaders at the Countess of Chester Hospital still employed in senior positions in the NHS right up to the point that Lucy Letby was found guilty of murder? The absence of serious regulation means that a revolving door of individuals with a record of poor performance or misconduct can continue to work in the health service. Does the Secretary of State agree that that is simply unacceptable in a public service that takes people’s lives into its hands?

    The lack of consistent standards is also hampering efforts to improve the quality of management. I am sure the Secretary of State will agree that good management is absolutely vital for staff wellbeing, clinical outcomes, efficient services and, most of all, patient safety. The case for change has been made previously. Sir Robert Francis, who led the inquiry into the deaths at Mid Staffs, argued in 2017 that NHS managers should be subject to professional regulation. In 2019, the Kark review, commissioned by the Secretary of State, called for a regulator to maintain a register of NHS executives, with

    “the power to disbar managers for serious misconduct”.

    In 2022, the Messenger review commissioned by the right hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Sajid Javid) recommended a single set of core leadership and management standards for managers, with training and development provided to help them meet these standards. We must act to prevent further tragedies, so I welcome the Secretary of State’s announcement that his Department is reconsidering Kark’s recommendation 5. Labour is calling for the disbarring of senior managers found guilty of serious misconduct, so I can guarantee him our support if he brings that proposal forward.

    The Secretary of State should go further. Will he now begin the process of bringing in a regulatory system for NHS management, alongside standards and quality training? Surely we owe it to the families and the staff who were let down by a leadership team at the Countess of Chester Hospital that was simply not fit for purpose.

    Finally, I know that I speak for the whole House when I say that the parents of Child A, Child C, Child D, Child E, Child G, Child I, Child O and Child P are constantly in our thoughts, as are the many other families who worry whether their children have also been victims of Lucy Letby. We owe it to them to do what we can to prevent anything like this from ever happening again. As the Government seek to do that, they will have our full support.

    Steve Barclay

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for the content of his response and the manner in which he delivered it. I think it underscores the unity of this House in our condemnation of these crimes, and our focus on putting the families at the centre of getting answers to the questions that arise from this case. I join him in paying tribute to those consultants who spoke up to trigger the police investigation and to prevent further harm to babies. I note the further work that the police are doing in this case, and also pay tribute to the police team, which I had the privilege of meeting. They have worked incredibly hard in very difficult circumstances in the course of this investigation.

    As the hon. Gentleman said, the families are absolutely central to the approach that we are taking. That is why I felt that it was very important to discuss with them the relative merits of different types of inquiry, but their response was very clear in terms of their preference for a statutory inquiry. I have certainly surfaced to Lady Justice Thirlwall some of the comments from the families in terms of the potential to phase it. Of course, those will be issues for the judge to determine.

    On the hon. Gentleman’s concerns around the revolving door, clearly a number of measures have already been taken, but I share his desire to ensure that there is accountability for decisions. As Members will know, I have been vocal about that in previous roles, and it is central to many of the families’ questions on wider regulation within the NHS.

    The hon. Gentleman mentioned the importance of good management. I am extremely interested in how, through this review and the steps we can take ahead of it, we give further support to managers within the NHS and to non-exec directors. The Government accepted in full the seven recommendations of the Messenger review. The Kark review was largely accepted. There was the issue of recommendation 5, which is why it is right that we look again at that in the light of the further evidence.

    It is clear that a significant amount of work has already gone in. A number of figures, including Aidan Fowler and Henrietta Hughes, have focused on safeguarding patient safety, but in the wake of this case we need to look again at where we can go further, which the statutory inquiry will do with the full weight of the law. I am keen, however, that we also consider what further, quicker measures can be taken. Indeed, I have been in regular contact with NHS England to take that work forward.

  • Wes Streeting – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Charging for Access to NHS

    Wes Streeting – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Charging for Access to NHS

    The parliamentary question asked by Wes Streeting, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, in the House of Commons on 24 January 2023.

    Wes Streeting (Ilford North) (Lab)

    Labour founded the NHS to be free at the point of use, and we want to keep it that way. Given that the Prime Minister has advocated charging for GP appointments, and one of the Secretary of State’s predecessors has urged him to charge for A&E visits, will he take this opportunity to rule out any extension to user charging in the NHS?

    Steve Barclay

    I can see from your reaction, Mr Speaker, and the reaction of colleagues in the House, that that is a misrepresentation of the Prime Minister’s position. For the majority of its existence, the NHS has been run by Conservative Governments. We remain committed to treatment free at the point of use. That is the Prime Minister’s position and the Government’s position.

    Wes Streeting

    I note that the Secretary of State did not rule out any future extension of user charging, and I am sure that patients will have noticed too. Given that the chief executive of NHS England has said that the NHS needs to expand training; that many of the Secretary of State’s own Back Benchers are echoing Labour’s calls to double the number of medical school places; and that he has no plan whatsoever to expand NHS medical school training places, nursing and midwifery clinical training places, to double the number of district nurses qualifying, or to provide 5,000 more health visitors, is it not time for the Conservatives to swallow their pride, admit that they have no plan and adopt Labour’s workforce plan instead?

    Steve Barclay

    I am not surprised that the hon. Gentleman wants to misrepresent the Government’s plan, not least because his own plan is disintegrating before his own Front Bench. The hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell), who spoke earlier, contradicted his point. Not only have the hon. Gentleman’s Front-Bench colleagues contradicted it; even the deputy chair of the British Medical Association has said that Labour’s plan would create higher demand and longer waiting times. I am not surprised that the hon. Gentleman does not want to talk about his own plans anymore; that is why he has taken to distorting ours.

  • Wes Streeting – 2023 Comments on Sajid Javid’s Suggestion of Charging for Using NHS

    Wes Streeting – 2023 Comments on Sajid Javid’s Suggestion of Charging for Using NHS

    The comments made by Wes Streeting, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on Twitter on 21 January 2023.

    Over my dead body.

    An NHS free at the point of use has been its central equitable principle for 75 years. Patients should never have to worry about the bill.

    It’s up to Labour, which founded the NHS, to grip the biggest crisis in its history and make it fit for the future.

  • Wes Streeting – 2023 Speech on NHS Winter Pressures

    Wes Streeting – 2023 Speech on NHS Winter Pressures

    The speech made by Wes Streeting, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, in the House of Commons on 9 January 2023.

    Happy new year to you, Mr Speaker, and to the rest of the House. I thank the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care for advance sight of his statement.

    This winter has seen patients waiting hours on end for an ambulance, A&E departments overflowing with patients, and dedicated NHS staff driven to industrial action—in the case of nurses, for the first time in their history—because the Government have failed to listen and to lead. I notice that the Secretary of State did not talk about the abysmal failure of his talks with nurses and paramedic representatives today. Let me say to him: every cancelled operation and delayed appointment, and the ambulance disruption due to strikes, could have been avoided if he had just agreed to talk to NHS staff about pay. Today, he could have opened serious talks to avert further strikes. Instead, he offered nurses and paramedics 45 minutes of lip service. If patients suffer further strike action, they will know exactly who to blame.

    Of course, the Prime Minister has already shown that he is not interested in solving problems; he resorts to the smokescreen of parliamentary game playing by bringing in legislation to sack NHS staff for going on strike. I ask the Secretary of State, in his sacking NHS staff Bill, how many nurses is he planning to sack? How many paramedics will he sack? How many junior doctors will he sack? The Government have the audacity to ask NHS staff for minimum service levels, but when will we see minimum service levels from Government Ministers and the entire Government?

    After arriving at the Derriford Hospital in Plymouth, an 83-year-old dementia patient waited in the back of an ambulance outside A&E for 26 hours before being admitted. That was on 23 December, when no strikes were taking place; the Secretary of State should listen. The patient’s family found him in urine-soaked sheets, and since arriving in hospital, he has contracted flu. His daughter said of the hospital staff:

    “They’re polite, they’re caring, and they are trying their best. It’s just impossible for them to do the work they want to do.”

    Let me say what the Health Secretary and Prime Minister refuse to admit: the NHS is in crisis—the biggest crisis in its history. That is clear to the staff who have been slogging their guts out over Christmas and to everyone who uses it as a patient; the only people who cannot see it are the Government.

    What has been announced today is yet another sticking plaster when the NHS needs fundamental reform. The front door to the NHS is blocked, the exit door is blocked, and there are simply not enough staff. Where is the Conservatives’ plan to fix primary care, so that patients can see the GP they want in the manner they choose? After 13 years of Conservative government, they do not have one. Where is the plan to recruit the care workers needed to care for patients once they have been discharged from hospitals, and to pay them fairly so that we do not lose them to other employers? After 13 years of Conservative government, they do not have one. Where is the plan to train the doctors, nurses and health professionals the NHS needs? After 13 years of Conservative government, they do not have one.

    Well, we do. The Secretary of State is welcome to nick Labour’s plan to abolish non-dom tax status and train 7,500 more doctors and 10,000 more nurses and midwives every year; to double the number of district nurses; and to provide 5,000 more health visitors—a plan so good that the Chancellor admitted that the Conservative Government should nick it. After 13 years of mismanagement, underfunding and costly top-down reorganisations, however, all the Conservatives have to offer the NHS is a meeting and a photo op in Downing Street.

    The collapse of the health service this winter could be seen coming a mile away—health and social care leaders were warning about it last summer—so why is the Secretary of State announcing these measures in the middle of January? Why have care homes and local authorities been made to wait until this month for the delayed discharge fund to reach them? It is simply too little, too late for many patients.

    In fact, this Government are so last minute that, after announcing this plan last night, they found an extra £50 million and sent out another press release. I know most of us are happy to find a spare fiver lying around the house that we did not know was there, but this Prime Minister seems to have 50 million quid stuck down the back of the sofa. What on earth is going on? No wonder they cannot get money to the frontline: the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing.

    It is intolerable that patients who are fit and ready to leave hospital are then stuck there for months because the care they need is not available in the community. They are not bed blockers, and they are not an inconvenience to be dropped off at a hotel and forgotten about. They need rehabilitation at home, rather than a bed in a care facility. Vulnerable patients deserve proper support suited to their needs, or they will fall ill again and go back to hospital. What about all these beds the NHS is procuring, and what about the capacity that families need? I will tell hon. Members what will happen: they will not get the care, and they will be coming right back through the front door of A&E, with the cycle of broken systems repeating itself again and again. Where is the choice and control for patients and their families who may not want to be discharged to a hotel?

    I am afraid that, after 13 years, this just is not good enough. The Prime Minister might not rely on the NHS, but millions of ordinary people do. They are sick and they are tired of waiting. There have been 13 years of Conservative Government now—13 years—and look at what they have done to the NHS. Did the Health Secretary listen to himself as he described the situation in hospitals of people waiting on chairs for discharge, the trolleys in the corridors and people waiting longer than ever? Whose fault is it? It is not that of the NHS staff he is threatening to sack, but of the Conservative Ministers who have made disaster after disaster. After 13 years of Conservative Government it is clear that the longer they are in power, the longer patients will wait. Only Labour can give the NHS the fresh start and fresh ideas it needs.

    Steve Barclay

    The hon. Member talks about a fresh start, but even his own shadow Cabinet colleagues do not seem to agree with his plans. His own deputy leader seemed to distance herself from his plans to use the private sector, and his own shadow Chancellor seems to have distanced herself from his plans for GPs. Perhaps he can share with the House exactly how much his unfunded plans for GPs will cost, because the chief executive of the Nuffield Trust has said:

    “It will cost a fortune”,

    and is

    “based on an out of date view”.

    The point is that he has no plans that his deputy and his own colleagues support, and he has not set out how he would fund those plans in a way that does not divert resource from other parts of the NHS.

    The hon. Member talked about pressure, yet there was no mention of the fact that the NHS in Wales, the NHS in Scotland and, indeed, health systems across the globe have faced significant pressure as a result of the combination of covid spikes and flu spikes, particularly in recent weeks. This is not a phenomenon limited to England and the NHS; this is a pressure that has been reflected internationally, including for the NHS in Wales.

    The hon. Member refers to talks with the trade unions, and it is right that we are engaging with the trade unions. I was pleased to meet the staff council of the NHS today. Indeed, the chair of the NHS staff council, Sara Gorton, said the discussions had made “progress”, notwithstanding one trade union leader who was not in the talks giving an interview outside the Department to comment on what had and had not been said in those talks. We want to work constructively with the trade unions on that.

    The hon. Member says that we are only announcing measures today, but again, he seems to have written those comments before he got a copy of the statement. The integrated care boards took operational effect in July last year—[Interruption.] Because they are scaling up, we are putting control centres in place and we are integrating health and social care. In the autumn statement, we announced £500 million for discharge, a further £600 million next year and £1 billion the year after, recognising that there is significant pressure, and that is ramping up. NHS England set out its operational plans in the summer, including the 100-day discharge sprint. That, for example, set out the greater use of virtual wards, which is new technology being rolled out at scale. It also announced the extra 7,000 community beds. Indeed, we also set out the additional measures in our plan for patients.

    What is clear when we have a sevenfold increase in flu in a month—50 cases admitted last year compared with 5,100 this year—is that there is a combination of a surge in demand on top of the existing high-level position, and the surge in demand corresponds with a constraint on supply as staff absences also increase because of flu, so during the Christmas period community services are more constrained. Those two things together have created significant pressure on our emergency departments. That is why in the engagement I have had with health leaders the two key messages they gave to me were the importance of getting flow into hospitals, which is constrained by the high bed occupancy—that is why getting people out of hospital is so central to relieving pressure—and, within the emergency departments specifically, the need to decompress those services with same-day emergency treatment and having short stay post-emergency departments. That is a better way to decompress those emergency departments—through the triaging and bringing other clinical specialties closer to the front door. We have listened to the NHS frontline and those were the two key requests made to me, alongside other issues such as care quality inspections and how to make them more flexible. However, alongside those immediate pressures, we need to recognise that we had pressures last summer during the heatwave and we had pressures in the autumn, which is why we have announced a wider set of measures today.

    So we have listened and we have acted; we have taken measures to deal with the immediate pressure, but we have also set out how we will build further capacity that will go through into the autumn. Alongside that, we have signed deals, for example with Moderna and BioNTech, and we are bringing forward the life science investment so that that has a better impact on pressures on the frontline.

  • Wes Streeting – 2023 Comments on the NHS

    Wes Streeting – 2023 Comments on the NHS

    The comments made by Wes Streeting, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on Twitter on 2 January 2023.

    The NHS is buckling under pressures that staff have been raising the alarm about for months and months. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine warns of hundreds of deaths each week. Where is the Government?!

  • Wes Streeting – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Wes Streeting – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Wes Streeting on 2016-01-22.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what meetings Ministers of his Department have had with the Financial Conduct Authority since May 2015.

    Harriett Baldwin

    Treasury Ministers and officials meet regularly with the Financial Conduct Authority to discuss relevant regulatory issues.

    As was the case with previous Administrations, it is not the Treasury’s practice to provide details of all such discussions.

  • Wes Streeting – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Wes Streeting – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Wes Streeting on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what representations his Department has made to the President of Sri Lanka on (a) the implementation of UN Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 and (b) the involvement of foreign judges and prosecutors in the investigation and prosecution of war crimes during the Sri Lankan civil war since the last ministerial visit to Sri Lanka.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    We regularly discuss progress and developments in Sri Lanka with the government, including on UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) resolution 30/1. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond) did so when he met President Sirisena on 12 May and our High Commissioner to Sri Lanka did so on 10 May. I also discussed this with the Prime Minister Wickremesinghe and Foreign Minister Samaraweera when I visited Sri Lanka in January. We encourage the government to implement fully its commitments to the UNHRC resolution on reconciliation, accountability and human rights, and look forward to the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ assessment of Sri Lanka’s progress in June.

  • Wes Streeting – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Wes Streeting – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Wes Streeting on 2016-01-22.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what representations his Department has made to the Financial Conduct Authority on its review of banking culture since May 2015.

    Harriett Baldwin

    The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is an independent regulator. No Treasury Minister or official made any representations to the FCA about its review of banking culture before the FCA decided to discontinue that review.

  • Wes Streeting – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Wes Streeting – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Wes Streeting on 2016-05-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what recent representations her Department has made to the Israeli government on the demolition of Palestinian homes and property funded by the UK.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    The UK remains extremely concerned at the large increase in demolitions in the Occupied Palestinian Territories since the start of 2016, compared to the monthly average in 2015, and continues to raise this with the Israeli authorities. Demolitions and the evictions of Palestinians from their homes cause unnecessary suffering, are harmful to the peace process, and in all but the most exceptional of cases are contrary to international humanitarian law. The UK supports the Norwegian Refugee Council to provide legal aid to Palestinian communities that are at risk of displacement.