Westminster Hall

Thursday 6th March 2025 Westminster Hall

Thursday 6 March 2025

[Karl Turner in the Chair]

Backbench Business

English Football: Financial Sustainability and Governance

Thursday 6th March 2025 Westminster Hall

13:30

[Yuan Yang (Earley and Woodley) (Lab) [R]]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the financial sustainability and governance of English football.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. Clubs across the country face unsustainable finances and poor governance, which is why so many MPs have gathered here to represent their local clubs. We have a range of clubs from up and down the football pyramid and up and down the country: from Brighton to Basingstoke, from Bolton to Luton, from Wolves to Aylesbury. We have MPs from various parties, and we even have Reading fans in the same room as Oxford United fans, showing the unity and strength of feeling across Parliament that football must have a sustainable future.

Before I go into the concerns that we all share, and the remedies we would like to see, I will give a brief history of how we got here. Since the premier league was formed over three decades ago, over 50 clubs in the top six tiers of the English men�s football pyramid have gone into administration. One of those clubs is Bury. After being sold for �1 in 2019, Bury went out of business and was expelled from the league. The following year, 2020, saw the demise of Macclesfield Town and Wigan Athletic going into administration. In the following year, 2021, while England�s top six clubs briefly broke away to try to form a European league, Derby County slipped into administration.

These clubs and this chaos is just the tip of the iceberg. According to research by the non-governmental organisation Fair Game, the majority of the top 92 clubs in the game are technically insolvent, meaning their liabilities exceed their assets. That is a precarious situation for any business to be in, but football clubs are not just any business; they are the foundation of many of our communities, and they bring many of us pride in the areas that we live in.

One of the clubs that might be technically insolvent is Reading football club, which has its home stadium in my constituency of Earley and Woodley. Reading is one of the oldest clubs in England, and had previously been known for its good management. Now, after four winding-up petitions, five points deductions and persistent late tax payments, Reading sits on the brink. I started getting involved with the campaign to rescue Reading football club when I bumped into some fans at a local fair in Woodley a few years ago, who had read my reporting in the Financial Times. They knew I had an interest in scrutinising companies with complex structures and distant owners, and they asked whether I had an interest in scrutinising a local company with a complex structure and distant owners. But fans should not have to do that kind of scrutiny. Life needs to be a lot simpler for fans just to be able to follow the game, and not worry about whether the game is up for their local club. So many fans have experienced what Reading has gone through, and we owe it to them to voice the problems that we see across the football pyramid.

I will pick out three particular problems, which I am sure will feel familiar for many of those listening: first, how clubs receive income; secondly, how they spend their money; and thirdly, irresponsible ownership.

[Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)]

Chesterfield football club wanted me to put on the record its support for the work of football governance. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is extraordinary that, on the one hand, we have a monstrous success story in the level of money in football, but on the other, we have almost the entire English football league running effectively bankrupt and relying on the owners for bail-outs year after year? That simply cannot make sense as a model, can it?

[Yuan Yang]

I agree with my hon. Friend, who is an advocate for his local club, that too many clubs across the country are suffering from the unfair distribution through the football pyramid. In fact, that is the first issue I will describe: the problem with the money going in. The last four decades have seen a complete transformation in English football, which has been characterised by a widening gap between the clubs at the very top and the rest of the football pyramid. Ticket sales over that time have become less important as a source of revenue. Instead, the biggest source has become the multibillion-pound broadcast deals agreed by the Premier League.

We all celebrate the success of the Premier League�s dealmaking, generating the most revenue out of the big five European leagues. That dealmaking is notable for many reasons, not just the large amount of money involved. The 20 premier league clubs get together to sell a deal collectively. However, economists and competition lawyers have raised concerns about the impact that collective selling has on fans and smaller clubs, and they have argued that collective selling is justified only when there is a public benefit. However, most clubs do not currently benefit from these broadcast revenues. The vast majority stay in the premier league and, as a result, the gap between the top and the rest grows wider every season.

This season, premier league clubs and the four recently relegated clubs held on to 94% of the league�s broadcast revenues. That means that the remainder of the 68 clubs in the EFL received just 6%. In comparison, the German Bundesliga ensures an 80:20 split between the top two divisions. Meanwhile, the Union of European Football Associations�better known as UEFA�allocates 75% to the champions league and 25% to the two competitions below it. Those leagues have chosen those ratios because they find that it creates a sustainable pyramid for them. The EFL has long sought a similar distribution ratio with the premier league.

We want all clubs to work together to protect the pyramid as a whole because, without its base, the top of the game would crumble. As we all know, the pyramid serves as a platform for player development and talent spotting. Reading�s Michael Olise broke through locally and moved on to Crystal Palace, and I am sure that we can think of many such examples.

The national popularity of the premier league rests on our strong local football cultures, which are spread by clubs in their communities and the sports charities attached to them, working with people aged six to 60-plus. However, last year, the premier league and the EFL failed to agree a deal for a more equitable distribution of funding between clubs, underscoring just how sticky the first problem of income is.

The second problem is the money going out�the expenditure. Costs have been driven up to unsustainable levels. The concentration of riches in the premier league creates an overwhelming incentive to spend big and chase the dream. According to football finance expert Kieran Maguire, on average, for every �100 a championship club brings in through revenue, it spends �101 in wages. That is clearly unsustainable. Reading�s current owners, Dai Yongge and Dai Xiu Li, took over in 2017 when Reading was near the top of the championship. They also chased the dream. By 2021, Reading football club was spending over 200% of its annual revenue on player wages. Overall, Reading�s owners have invested over �200 million in the club. It is no surprise that they would spend at that level.

The NGO Fair Game has shown a clear correlation between how high a club is in the league and how high its spending is on wages. This competition is made more intense because of parachute payments, which I will not go into at length. However, overall, the pressure to compete means that clubs often spend beyond their means. This is unsustainable. We have spending rules such as financial fair play, but breaches continue to happen.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making an important point about costs. One of the brilliant football clubs in my constituency, the Aylesbury Vale Dynamos, really struggles with the cost of keeping its ground maintained. It is at real risk of flooding, and the cost of dealing with that is huge. The other club in my constituency, Aylesbury United, has not had a ground in Aylesbury since 2006. Does my hon. Friend agree that, given the costs that they incur, having access to a secure and financially sustainable ground to play on is an essential part of the sustainability of vital grassroots football clubs?

[Yuan Yang]

I agree with my hon. Friend, who has a deep interest in her local clubs. Fans need to be able to see their clubs perform in their local area. Many MPs who are in this debate have concerns about the relocation of their grounds or lack of appropriate grounds.

The final problem is ownership. The first two problems have shown how little incentive there is to be a well-run club that spends responsibly. Most clubs rely on a generous owner to stay afloat. When the good will or cash flow of that owner starts to run dry, clubs often have nowhere else to turn. Reading fans know the perils of this dependence. The current owners, the Dai siblings, put the club up for sale almost two years ago, but they have not been seen at the club in well over a year. Fans have mostly been kept in the dark. Credible bidders for the club�some of whom I have had the fortune to speak to�have made offers, and they have been turned down and dragged through lengthy negotiations. Bidders have faced difficulties in navigating the ownership structure of the club in which the stadium, the training grounds and the club itself have been separated into different corporate entities, and in which club assets have been used as collateral for other loans.

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech, and I can forgive her for being from Reading�at least she is not from Swindon. Oxford United, which I was grateful that she mentioned, must be able to move out of the Kassam stadium for which it is charged unviable rent, despite lacking a fourth stand and many other problems. Does she agree that the club�s exciting proposals for a new stadium in Kidlington must go forward, but that future governance models need to stop previous owners from entrapping clubs in unviable and unsustainable stadiums?

[Yuan Yang]

I very much agree. Stadiums are also vital community assets. I look forward to one day seeing Reading beat Oxford at the new Kidlington stadium.

What the EFL has at present is the use of fines. The owners of Reading have been fined on numerous occasions for failing to fund their monthly wage bill, but that has not changed behaviour. The most frustrating thing for Reading fans, as I am sure it has been for Portsmouth, Leeds, Bury and Charlton fans before them, is a feeling that the whole chaos could have been avoided if the EFL had had sufficient powers to implement a more robust owners test when the current owners, the Dai siblings, first took over.

[Chris Ward (Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven) (Lab)]

I never thought I would say this, but I have a lot of sympathy with Reading fans at the moment. When I was a kid growing up, my team, Brighton and Hove Albion, experienced a lot of what my hon. Friend�s team is experiencing now. When Reading was well run by the Madejski family, Brighton were at the bottom of the league in very much the opposite scenario, and Brighton are now enjoying the other side of the pendulum. We have probably the best type of ownership. It is a fantastic model that everyone should try to emulate. Does my hon. Friend not agree that the lottery of ownership�the pendulum that went from, when I was young, Brighton having to sell their ground and play in Gillingham, to Reading now experiencing the problems that they are experiencing�is what we need to change with the regulator?

[Yuan Yang]

That is absolutely the case. My hon. Friend highlights the history of his club in Brighton. In the �80s and �90s when the future was unclear, it was down to the owners. Too much, unfortunately, is down to, as he mentioned, the lottery of ownership. Brighton and Hove is now a well-managed club. I think we can have many such positive stories across the country, including a positive story, and a positive outcome, for Reading, but the question about football governance and sustainability affects all of us in this room today.

[John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)]

The hon. Lady is making a passionate speech and has done a great job of bringing us all to this Chamber. I lived through Reading�s trials through my stepson who is a season ticket holder� obviously, my first love is for the Whites in Salisbury. Does she not recognise the fundamental challenges of disturbing a market that contains one of our greatest national assets, which is the premier league? I feel quite torn and anxious about the scope creep of any regulatory intervention, although I accept that the core of what she says has a lot of merit.

[Yuan Yang]

I always appreciate my fellow Treasury Committee member�s comments on the correct regulation of markets, but I would argue that football clubs are not simply a commodity and football competition is not simply a market. If we were to accept that view and for the sake of argument say, �Let�s treat the competitions as a market�, I would argue that we have severe market failure when over 50 clubs have gone into administration in the last four decades. The externalities of that market failure are borne too much by the fans sitting in the room with us today.

[Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. We do not have competition right now. In the premier league, the three promoted clubs are almost certainly likely to go back down to the championship. The disparity of money and funding means we are losing what is the best part of English football: competition. If we really want competition, we have to make the money go down the pyramid more fairly.

[Yuan Yang]

I agree with my hon. Friend. Parachute payments skew the financial incentives in the game. I also agree that we do not have the full competition that would allow clubs to play their best game, which is what we fans want to see.

Why does all of this matter? It is about the community at the end of the day. Some might say it is only a game, but for many of my constituents the importance of our football club stretches beyond the game and into the community. Reading football club�s community trust is run by volunteers. It supports young people and promotes social inclusion and participation in sport. In many of our most deprived communities across the country, it is the local club that sets a model for aspiration.

Constituents always tell me how important Reading FC is to them and how important it has been to their families going back generations. Just the other day I received an email from a fifth generation Reading fan. One constituent wrote to me:

�Reading was and is a family club��

a club in previous years awarded family excellence status. Yet it is at risk of not being around for the families of tomorrow. Working with fan groups�some are here with us today�since my election last year, I have seen at first hand how motivated those volunteers are by this common cause. Fans want to see a competition for points; they do not want a competition to the death.

While Reading is in exclusive talks with a new potential buyer, we need to ensure that the same story is not repeated anywhere else, so I am delighted that the Government are bringing the Football Governance Bill through Parliament to create an independent football regulator. I will be meeting the shadow regulator in a few weeks to ensure that they have a full picture of what has happened at Reading, and what can happen when absent owners neglect their clubs. I encourage all Members to do the same. We need a right-touch regulator that helps us to build a football pyramid with strong foundations, and we need a football regulator that can pass the Reading test, so that fans elsewhere do not have to go through the problems that Reading went through.

Football has a problem around governance and financial sustainability, but fans and Parliament working together can fix it. I am glad the House is considering this motion.

[Several hon. Members rose�]

[Karl Turner (in the Chair)]

Order. I remind hon. Members that they should bob if they wish to be called to speak. There are 29 Back Benchers wishing to catch my eye, so the speech limit will be a minute and a half. If you have to make an intervention, I respectfully request that it be very short. Remember that making an intervention may mean that you are not called in the debate, so please be considerate to colleagues. I will call the first Front Bencher at 2.28 pm.

13:46

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) for securing this important debate and for eloquently setting out many of the governance and sustainability issues in English football.

English football is central to the social fabric of Britain and is one of our greatest exports. It is more than a sport; it is the beating heart of our local communities. I agree with Bill Shankly: some people think football is a matter of life and death, but I assure you it�s much more serious than that. Each week, fans come together to back their club and create a shared sense of identity. The social impact of local clubs goes far beyond the pitch. In my totally unbiased opinion, there is no better proof of that than Luton.

Luton Town FC is at the heart of our town and has worked for years in partnership with local charities. The Luton Town Community Trust, which was founded in 2008, is a charity dedicated to delivering community service to people across Luton and Bedfordshire, using the power of football to make a positive impact in sports, education, health and social cohesion.

The club is at the heart of the town, and the fans are the heart of the club. Throughout the ups and downs of Luton Town FC�s journey, it has been the fans who stepped up to fight fiercely to protect our proud Hatters heritage when reckless ownership threatened to tear it down. The fan-led 2020 consortium bought out the club from further mismanagement after it went into administration in 2007.

We all know that Luton�s promotion in 2023 was historic, but that promotion was a springboard for further exciting prospects for our town. There are detailed plans for the Power Court site, which will be the new home of Luton Town FC. It will transform Luton�s economy by directly contributing between �100 million and �250 million per year and supporting between 900 and more than 1,100 jobs.

Despite the consensus that there is much to celebrate about the success of English football, the underlying governance structure and its financial sustainability are highly fragile. I am therefore delighted that our Labour Government have reintroduced a strengthened Football Governance Bill, delivering on our manifesto commitment to establish the independent football regulator and a new set of rules to protect clubs, empower fans and keep clubs at the heart of our communities. Crucially, the Bill will ensure that fans are prioritised at the heart of the game, which is what our football clubs should be about. I am proud that Luton is already a great example of putting fans first.

13:48

[Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) on securing this important and timely debate.

For places like Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes, football is more than a game; it is the beating heart of our town, a source of identity, pride and belonging. Grimsby Town FC is an institution. It was formed in 1878 in the Wellington Arms on Freeman Street, and Blundell Park was built in 1899; one of the original stands is still in operation. Through the Grimsby Town Foundation, the club has generated more than �4 million in social value, supporting education, mental health and opportunities for young people.

For too long, the football pyramid has meant that clubs up and down the country have faced uncertainty through bad ownership, financial mismanagement and an unfair distribution of wealth. It has left many on the brink. I welcome the Football Governance Bill�s intent to address those long-standing issues. Introducing an independent regulator to protect clubs ensures financial sustainability and puts the focus back on the heart of decision making.

I commend David Artell and his team for their fantastic recent form�they have had seven games unbeaten and are pushing for the play-offs. We must ensure that our clubs and community assets are protected for future generations. I will end by saying: up the Mariners!

13:50

[Olivia Bailey (Reading West and Mid Berkshire) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) on securing this important debate. I echo her remarks about the betrayal of Reading FC by its owners and the importance of the club to families across Reading and Berkshire.

Although the home of the Royals now sits in my hon. Friend�s constituency, for more than 100 years of Reading FC�s long and proud history it was at Elm Park, just outside the boundary of Reading West and Mid Berkshire. It had a large open terrace at the western edge of the ground called the Tilehurst end, named after Tilehurst in my constituency. The passion and loyalty that supporters of the club show in my constituency are illustrated by the long queues of fans waiting to catch a bus to the stadium on a match day.

The only rivals Reading FC players and fans should be battling against are our friends in Oxford and Swindon. Unfortunately, the club has had to battle against the very person who should be its greatest supporter: its owner. I will not repeat what my hon. Friend said, as she explained the situation clearly, but I will say that she is a wonderful champion of Reading FC, along with other colleagues. I thank the supporters� groups, STAR�Supporters Trust at Reading�and Sell Before We Dai, who have been tireless campaigners, alongside all other loyal fans who have stood alongside their club.

None of that had to happen. It could have been prevented if Dai Yongge had acted in the interests of his club and if we had had proper regulation of the football industry and proper protection for clubs such as Reading. That is why I echo my hon. Friend�s call for a comprehensive inquiry and why I am so supportive of the Government�s Football Governance Bill, which will establish an independent football regulator.

13:51

[James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) on securing the debate. I declare an interest: I am a Norwich City fan and a King�s Lynn Town supporter.

The premier league is the most viewed league in the world and supports 90,000 jobs across the country, and league one is also very popular, so football is a success. I want to focus on the governance proposals, particularly in the Football Governance Bill. All fans would sign up to the key objectives of ensuring financial sustainability, preventing breakaway competitions and protecting heritage, but my concerns are about possible over-regulation and overreach. I welcome the amendments that have been tabled in the other place to introduce a growth duty into the Bill, which the Government previously resisted.

Of course, the provisions on revenues attract the most attention. Let us be clear that the proposal is for the Government to take the power to mandate how to divide the proceeds of football. Currently, there is a voluntary distribution of the revenues through the football pyramid, and that is essential to the health of the game. We are seeing the impact of the proposals: the EFL is refusing to negotiate with the Premier League and has said that it is waiting for the backstop powers to come into force.

The Government have made the proposals even worse by including parachute payments in the backstop. That is a complete mistake, because clubs such as Norwich need the certainty of parachute payments to invest so that they can compete in the league. That would ensure we have a competitive league that generates income. The EFL will not engage with the 3UP national league campaign, because it is waiting for the backstop before making a view on whether to get one more promotion from the national league.

13:53

[Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)]

As I said in my brief intervention on my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang), I have been contacted by Chesterfield football club, which is very keen that its support for the Football Governance Bill be known.

I would like to start by expressing the sadness that everyone in Chesterfield feels at the news that the club�s owner, Phil Kirk, has inoperable cancer and is receiving end-of-life care. He is the absolute epitome of a great owner and has absolutely transformed Chesterfield�s fortunes. Chesterfield has also had the opposite: Darren Brown almost took the club into insolvency at the same time that he was going to jail, so we know that there have been many owners who have let clubs down.

There have also been lots of owners who did everything they could, but were simply not wealthy enough to operate within a business model according to which the better a club does, and the further along the way it gets towards the premier league, the greater its losses are on every step of the way. It loses money by being promoted from league one to the championship. There is a perverse incentive where the financial success of the company gets worse the better it does, until it reaches the promised land of the premier league. That all needs changing. It is madness.

We have a very wealthy game. A slightly better distribution would still allow the premier league to be the golden goose, but it would also support the pyramid.

13:55

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

Wherever people go in the world, whichever bar they walk into, the one thing we can guarantee is that they will see a premier league game being played. That is the strength of the United Kingdom�s export and the stranglehold that we have on football across the world. Any other country would want to topple us from that position, so we must be very careful when we look to regulate in this space. That does not mean that I do not have sympathy; just down the road from me is Coventry City, which to say the least has had a turbulent time in its dealings with the premier league and now with its rebuild.

I want to concentrate on one area that I think is really important. When sentence is passed on a criminal, there is a mechanism through which the Government can ask the Parole Board to have another look. That would work really well in this situation. We need an independent regulator to satisfy FIFA and UEFA, but Parliament also needs to be able to hold people to account. To find an example, we need only look at when FA cup replays were taken away last year. The public were upset, the clubs were upset, but the decision was taken. I argue that a parole board mechanism would allow the Government to say to the regulator, �Have another look.� If it still decides to do it, fantastic, but at least we will have had our say.

13:56

[Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr Turner. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) on securing this debate. I will focus on one area of the proposed legislation: the distribution of wealth around the game.

It is not true that anyone wants to destroy the premier league or kill the golden goose. What people want is a fair distribution of resources. Over the past seven years, two of the clubs that have been promoted have been in receipt of parachute payments. It is small wonder that that happens when the average club in receipt of parachute payments receives �49 million, while a non-parachute-payment club gets �5.4 million. That promotes risk-taking and distortion. No other organisation would accept, as the English Football League does, an outside organisation like the Premier League providing resources that distort the competition. That is why we need a regulator. We have to stop that risk-taking.

Another point that our legislation must address is the separation of clubs from their assets. The previous owner of Charlton Athletic, my local side, now owns the ground and the training ground. We have to find a mechanism that could bring them back to the clubs.

13:58

[Rupert Lowe (Great Yarmouth) (Reform)]

As is seemingly my usual opening line in many of these debates, I am one of very few people elected in this place who has any actual experience of the industry that we are discussing. As a former premier league football chairman, I can honestly say that the premier league works. Britian does not have many success stories left, but our domestic football is one of them. My message to all of you is �Leave it alone.�

I mean this as a genuine question: do any of you understand the consequences of what you are looking to do? Regulating these industries does not work. London as a financial centre has withered and died on the vine since the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. Why would football be any different? The premier league projects unrivalled soft power, rakes in a fortune for HM Revenue and Customs and is actually good fun, usually offering competitive football, despite Southampton�s woeful record this season.

What is the Government�s plan? It was first proposed by the Conservatives, of course: regulate, strangulate, suffocate. Who wants that to happen the most? La Liga, Serie A, the Bundesliga and even the Saudis. A regulator would deter foreign investment and add bureaucracy to an already heavily governed industry. It is ludicrous and does nothing to protect clubs in the lower leagues. It should be revoked. Let us encourage and campaign, not regulate. The private sector built this success without regulation. My overriding message to all of you is �Leave football alone.�

13:59

[Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough and Thornaby East) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr Turner. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) on securing the debate. Football is more than just a sport in this country; it is a cornerstone of local pride and community identity. I say that as a proud Boro fan, and now as a fan of Thornaby FC. Since the premier league�s formation in 1992, its revenue gap with the EFL has grown from 33% to a simply staggering 1,600%. Two seasons ago, just 25 clubs received 92% of English football�s distributable revenues�around �3.3 billion�leaving the remaining 67 clubs to share only 8%, or �245 million. Parachute payments originally designed to assist relegated clubs now act as trampoline payments, giving some clubs an unfair financial advantage and limiting promotion opportunities.

There is enough money in English football for sustainability throughout the pyramid to be a realistic aspiration. That can be achieved without harming the premier league�s status as the primary league in the world. I welcome the Football Governance Bill and the establishment of an independent football regulator with enforcement powers to ensure financial security. Football is often called the beautiful game�we must ensure that it also remains the people�s game.

14:01

[David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) for securing this important debate. I am so lucky to have Port Vale Football Club, based in the mother town of Burslem in my constituency of Stoke-on-Trent North and Kidsgrove. A day out watching footy brings communities together, whether it is a home game at Vale Park with our team mascot, Boomer, or a community-run lads and dads club.

I pay tribute to Carol and Kevin Shanahan for all the work they do at Port Vale both on and off the pitch. Last season, the Port Vale Foundation supported more than 5,000 people in my constituency. The Shanahans have surrounded themselves with people who truly care for our community. From Matt Hancock to Darren Moore, and from the staff to the players, they make a real contribution to the lives of people in Burslem and beyond. As Darren Moore said only two weeks ago,

�The club is right at the heart of the community�.

I could not agree more.

In 2021, Port Vale was named the EFL community club of the year, and for good reason: it has upskilled our young people, it provides community meals at Vale Park, it delivered over 2,000 presents last Christmas, its Golden Valiants group tackles social isolation among our older community and its community cupboard at Tommy Cheadle�s keeps our local families fed.

Communities such as ours need additional support. Our EFL clubs, positioned in the heart of our communities, are perfectly located to offer that. Securing a sustainable football pyramid is key to cementing the future of our valued clubs and the communities they empower.

14:02

[Baggy Shanker (Derby South) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) for securing this important and timely debate. So many things make me proud to be an MP from Derby, and Derby County football club is one of them. We have some of the most dedicated and passionate fans in the country.

However, as anyone who has followed the fortunes of Derby County will know, we have had our fair share of financial difficulty. In 2021, our beloved club entered administration. I know at first hand how the lack of transparency made the subsequent negotiations and the administrators� job difficult, and I was involved in a number of those discussions. We were thankfully saved by a local man and fan, David Clowes, who stepped up to preserve Derby County for generations of fans to come, but the dire financial situation he faced in 2021 showed just how important securing financial stability is for clubs in the EFL.

EFL clubs will lose around �450 million this season. The financial instability jeopardises the clubs that sit at the heart of our communities. That is why I welcome the Government�s plans to introduce an independent football regulator through the strengthened Football Governance Bill. It is right that clubs are required to stick to stringent financial regulations.

14:04

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

Thank you for your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang). It was John Madejski who said that the best way to be a millionaire is to be a billionaire and buy a football club.

As well as being a supporter of Harlow Town football club who saw the effect on the mental health of fans when we had to withdraw from the league due to ongoing pitch issues, because they were not able to go and see their wonderful football team, I support another football team who, not too long ago, would have put fear in the hearts of the opposition players. They say that every team has one hard man, but Leeds United had 11. Unfortunately, due to financial mismanagement, I saw Leeds on the edge of self-destruction. As we are celebrating International Women�s Day at the weekend, we should be aware that when a club suffers the financial issues that Leeds United did, the women�s and youth teams and the community aspect of the club are cut to finance the first team.

I am running out of time but let me say that, sadly, the days of Bremner, Lorimer and Jack Charlton seem a long way away, even with the offer of Bielsa-ball. To those who think that we should not intervene in football governance I say that, as elected representatives, it is our job to represent the community.

14:06

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. Football is the UK�s most watched and played sport. Some 35 million fans have been watching the top four leagues this season, and there are 40,000 football clubs in this country�more than in any other country. As a season ticket holder of Wolverhampton Wanderers, I hope that our club will stay in the premier league.

The Premier League has a lot to offer. It contributes �8 billion to the UK economy and makes a direct tax contribution of �4.2 billion to the Exchequer�and, out of that contribution, �5 billion comes from outside London. In my constituency I also have a lower league football club, AFC Wulfrunians, soon to become Wolverhampton City football club. I know the contribution that the club makes to the community, just as my club Wolverhampton Wanderers does through its foundation.

I very much support the Football Governance Bill because an independent football regulator will make improvements. I hope that the Bill will create a proper process for distributing revenue throughout the football pyramid, with proper deals between the Premier League and the English Football League.

14:07

[John Grady (Glasgow East) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) for securing this excellent debate.

Last year I met representatives of Hampden bowling club and Football�s Square Mile who are working to preserve football heritage in my seat, which includes the birthplace of Alexander Watson Hutton, the founder of Argentinian football. Glasgow East is the start of the story that leads to Messi, Maradona and River Plate and Boca Juniors, which are the Oxford United and Reading of Buenos Aires. Their project points to something profound. Football is our history and culture. It is part of our families� history, and is a tie that brings us together.

All that draws us to football and more, in particular the emotion of hope. We all feel that hope at the beginning of a season that we might win something: the hope in the bleak midwinter that a team can win a derby�not my team Newcastle�or win a cup game. We lose this at our peril. I wonder whether football has lost sight of it. For example, in my lifetime, Rangers, Aberdeen and Celtic have won the European cup winners� cup and the European cup. Dundee United remains unbeaten against Barcelona. We heard mention of Leeds; we could also mention Forest and so on. Could that happen now? Not at all. The chance of success is concentrated on a small number of clubs. Many fans say that they have less interest in football as a result. This poses a profound challenge to our game. As Sir Bobby Robson said, football is about

�the noise, the passion, the feeling of belonging, the pride in your city.�

14:09

[Lizzi Collinge (Morecambe and Lunesdale) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. In Morecombe, the Shrimps are an integral part of our community. They bring together people from all backgrounds who share in our love of the Shrimps. The Morecambe FC Community Foundation runs a range of programmes that support education, health, social inclusion and sports participation. I am not the only parent from Morecambe who has had a child come back chattering about the professional footballers who came to help out that day.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way, not least because our respective teams are currently propping up the bottom of league two. She mentions the important community work that the Shrimps do, and that is vital. We are fortunate at Carlisle United to have very generous owners who have invested huge amounts of money over the last 18 months, but even I can see that community work can best be guaranteed by having a fairer distribution of revenues.

[Lizzi Collinge]

I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend. In Morecambe, the football club is a community hub that we cannot afford to lose. We have the Shrimps Trust, which is a democratic and representative voice for the fans. The board of Morecambe really want us to survive and thrive and is doing everything it can to make that happen. It is passionate about our success.

The Shrimps have been under a lot of pressure in recent years due to a combination of ownership issues, financial instability and the threat of relegation. My hon. Friends have laid out coherently the challenges with financial flow, ownership and governance, so I will not go through them again. In my first speech in Parliament, I reiterated my promise to the Shrimps to deliver an independent football regulator, a stronger owners and directors test, better fan representation and much better measures on financial sustainability. I only hope that it does not come too late for Morecambe FC.

14:11

[Luke Murphy (Basingstoke) (Lab)]

For too long, the governance and financial model of our game has left clubs vulnerable to mismanagement, unscrupulous ownership and, ultimately, financial ruin. I am fantastically proud of my local club Basingstoke Town FC, with its much-loved Camrose ground, but it is one such example. For over 70 years, the Camrose was the heart of our town�s club. It was a vital community hub where generations of fans came together to support their team, but the covenant on the ground that should have guaranteed a sports facility for the town for another three decades at least was, and continues to be, blatantly and disgracefully disregarded.

In 2016 the then chairman of the club sold the freehold of the Camrose to a company he owned, following years of underinvestment in the stadium. He eventually evicted the newly formed community club from the Camrose in April 2019. That stadium now stands in ruins. A once iconic stadium that brought pride and opportunities to our town has been reduced to a distant memory. In that time, it is the fans of the club, including those in the Gallery today, who have fought the injustice that went on and continue to power the club now. One such example is Jack Miller, the chairman, as well as all the volunteers who keep the club going.

Basingstoke Town is a non-league club. Those clubs also need protection. Could I ask the Minister to put on record what the Government plan to do about that?

14:12

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I commend and thank my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) for bringing forward this very important debate. I thank other colleagues for taking part today, including even my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds). Most of all, I thank the fans of Reading and other clubs who have come here today for their incredible patience and tolerance at this very difficult time.

I wholeheartedly support the Football Governance Bill. I want to reiterate in the brief time available the importance of the Bill based on what has happened to Reading. Put simply, Reading is in a terrible position because of poor ownership. As we heard eloquently from my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley and other colleagues, this is due to mismanagement by owners.

Reading faced relegation from the championship, which it had been in for a number of years�previously it was in the premiership. That was because of its owner, and not because of anything that happened on the pitch. The owner did not pay wages on time and the club was taken to court by His Majesty�s Revenue and Customs a number of times, which led to points deductions and relegation. That is an outrageous position for any club to be in; it simply should not happen. There needs to be a much better test of what makes for a fit and proper owner. I look forward to that coming forward in the Bill. I wholeheartedly support the Bill. I finish by urging Mr Dai Yongge to speed up the sale of Reading to a new owner who will invest in our wonderful club and take it forward.

00:00

[Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. Bolton Wanderers has been based in my constituency for over 25 years. It is no exaggeration to say that the stadium in Horwich, once known as the Reebok, now the Toughsheet community stadium, is the most important building in our borough. Bolton has long been a community club with international recognition. That is why it is not uncommon to see former Olympic sprinter Usain Bolt enjoying dinner in Westhoughton with one-time Wanderers player and long-time friend Ricardo Gardner.

In 2018, our historic club nearly went out of business. Bolton Wanderers entered 2019 subject to winding-up petitions from His Majesty�s Revenue and Customs; players were not paid and the club could not fulfil fixtures. I am pleased to say that the club has since recovered, thanks to the work of the new owners, Football Ventures, which is led by the formidable Sharon Brittan. Bolton now has a successful local business as its sponsor, with the incomparable Doug Mercer of Westhoughton firm Toughsheet stepping up to help the club. I pay tribute to Sharon, Doug, Phil Mason and Michael James, all of whom have done remarkable work to restore fans� trust and put the club back at the heart of the community.

In Bolton�s darkest time, it was the fans who rallied together; the supporters� trust was set up to give fans an organised voice through which to vent their anger and frustration. As MPs, we all know how important it to recognise the fundamental role that our clubs play in our communities. Their traditions, their history, their failures and their triumphs are all sown into the social fabric.

14:15

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

Reading football club is a community club. I have fond memories of going to Madejski stadium as a kid as part of a project with local schools�just one example of the fantastic work that clubs across this country do in their communities.

Unfortunately, Reading also offers a stark warning of what the bad management of football clubs can do to communities, and the effect it can have on the beautiful game, as was so eloquently touched on by my hon. Friends the Members for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang), for Reading West and Mid Berkshire (Olivia Bailey) and for Reading Central (Matt Rodda). I thank the Sell Before We Dai campaign and the Supporters Trust at Reading, whose chair is my constituent.

The Football Governance Bill will come too late for Reading, but I am determined that it will be there to protect clubs that find themselves in that invidious position in future. It is a good Bill. It was supported by the Tories in the previous Parliament, and that is why we have picked it up now, yet the Leader of the Opposition insists on opposing it. In her opinion, giving fans a say on how their own clubs are run would be a �waste of money�. Well, in the Tory game of political point scoring, it is fans who stand to lose out.

I ask the Minister to speak a little about support for clubs below the national league. Bracknell Town football club has been moved out of Bracknell by its owners, and it would be great to see�

[Karl Turner (in the Chair)]

Order. I call Steve Yemm.

14:17

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

In my constituency we are lucky enough to have Mansfield Town, founded in 1897, as our local club. We are currently in English football league one. The Stags, as they are known, have had their ups and downs, but I am pleased to say that the current owners have clearly indicated to me their commitment to our approach to financial sustainability and good governance. The chairman and members of the board have done a great deal of work to secure the future of the club, but I want to take this opportunity, just a few days prior to International Women�s Day, to recognise the work of Carolyn Radford, who has been the chief executive officer since 2011.

I am sure that hon. Members will agree that football clubs are often a focal point for communities, and that it is important that we nurture and support grassroots football in our constituencies. I am pleased to say that Mansfield Town does just that through the Radford and Hymas Academy and the Mansfield Town community trust. As the local MP, I wholeheartedly support that work, and I will do whatever I can to support those civic-minded aspirations; I hope they go from strength to strength in the coming years.

14:19

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) on securing the debate. Of course, this is a debate on English football governance, but for the benefit of Hansard I put on record the undebatable fact that Scottish football is the best in the world, because it has the highest per capita live attendance at matches and because of the existence of Falkirk FC.

The Football Governance Bill goes a long way to redressing the competition issues that have stained the beautiful game down south. The independent review and the licensing powers to prevent corporate mismanagement will hopefully prevent situations like the one currently facing Reading from happening again, and resolve the runaway inequality in the game.

That runaway inequality is something that the Scottish game is definitely not immune to. Failures in corporate governance and financial mismanagement stem from that inequality, as well as from an over-reliance on single owners and, uniquely, the lack of diversification in sources of income in Scotland.

More recently, we have seen anti-competitive decisions, such as the Scottish professional football league banning artificial surfaces from only the top flight in Scotland in 2024. Artificial surfaces are far more common in Scotland. The ban will force clubs such as Falkirk, Hamilton or Livi, which is currently in the championship, to fork out �1.5 million extra simply for getting promoted. It will prevent community use and provide barriers for women�s teams and shared ground arrangements. On artificial surfaces, the SPFL must think again.

14:20

[Dan Aldridge (Weston-super-Mare) (Lab)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. Football in England is not just a sport; it is a way of life. It binds communities together, gives local communities pride and provides opportunities both on and off the pitch, not least to my amazing nephews and my niece.

In my constituency, Weston-super-Mare AFC�the Seagulls to its fans�is more than just a football club. It is a social hub, a youth development centre and a lifeline for many. The club charity, Seagulls in the Community, led by trustees Andrew Kynaston, Bridget Bolland and Oli Bliss, leads a wide range of projects that have a direct impact on the lives of people in the town, including a youth club, a disability football team, a dementia caf�, and a veterans breakfast to name a few. It also opened the doors to the FUCHSIA cancer support group after its previous venue closed. Julie Crowther has been running this group for over 14 years, but without the football club�s willingness to offer up its facilities free of charge, that much-needed community resource might have been forced to close.

Football is for everyone, not just the elite. If we want our communities to thrive, we must act now to safeguard the entire football pyramid, so that clubs such as Weston-super-Mare AFC and thousands of others can continue to serve their communities for generations to come.

14:21

[Jack Abbott (Ipswich) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. No one in Ipswich is yet tired of reminding the world that we are now a premier league town. As I like to remind my colleagues in Essex and Norfolk in particular, we are the only premier league town in the east of England too.

One of the biggest issues that gets raised with me on the doorstep is the regeneration of our town. Having a financially secure and sustainable football club goes a long way to advancing that agenda. The economic benefits to our town include thousands of people travelling into our town centre and filling up the pubs, restaurants and shops. It has been estimated that premier league status has brought a huge �200 million to our town this season alone. More than that, it speaks to our civic pride and the sense of community that has been brought to our town under the leadership of Mark Ashton off the field and Kieran McKenna on it.

That has not always been the case. We, too, have seen our fair share of dark days and what poor leadership does when its rips out the sense of community and the links to businesses, academy players and so on. We have heard many examples today from Coventry, Portsmouth, Derby, Wigan, Reading�the list goes on and on. It is no exaggeration to say that when football clubs run into financial or other off-the-field issues, that impact is not just felt on the economy of the town; it has the potential to rip the heart and soul out of a place too. These clubs are not just commodities; they are our community�s crown jewels.

Labour�s Football Governance Bill is a landmark moment for safeguarding a financially sustainable and well-governed football pyramid. If we get it right, the prizes on offer for Ipswich and towns across the country are immense.

14:22

[Chris Ward (Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven) (Lab)]

I want to briefly tell the story of my local club, Brighton and Hove Albion, which is very much the story of the recent highs and lows of English football. In summary, I have been a Brighton fan for 30 years. The first 15 of those were pretty terrible, but the second 15 have been fantastic. In that time we have played in all four leagues. We were one game away from going out of the football league; now we have spent nearly a decade in the premier league, and we have enjoyed European nights against teams such as Marseille and Ajax.

In the dark days we experienced the very worst of ownership: our ground was sold and we ended up playing in Gillingham or in a rented athletics stadium. Despite the gloom, we always had two things on our side. First, we had the strength of our fans who stuck together through thick and thin, raised money, went on marches and did everything we could to keep the club going. Secondly, we found a saviour in new ownership�a Brighton fan and a genius; everything you would want in an owner�in the shape of Tony Bloom.

Because of those two things, we have gone through the lottery from the worst to the best of ownership. We heard in the opening speech about the test of the Football Governance Bill being the Reading test, but I want to impose a Brighton test. Could the Bill have stopped the first 15 years of my life, where we experienced the worst of ownership? A second test: will it encourage more owners to come forward who, in the shape of Tony Bloom, are rooted in the community, serve the community and deliver a fantastic football team? I hope very much that the Bill can do both.

[Karl Turner (in the Chair)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

14:24

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank the hon. Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) for securing this debate and for her diligence in campaigning, along with many others, as she highlighted in her speech, for the future of Reading football club. In the Reading area, including Wokingham, Bracknell and Newbury, the cross-party approach that has united fans and politicians of all political persuasions is to be applauded. I look forward to continuing to work with the hon. Member and others and Reading FC fans on this important issue.

Reading football club is a recent story of tragedy for its fans, for its community and for English football. Gone are the glory days of Sir John Madejski, former chairman, who embodied the very definition of what ownership of a football club should look like. I am young enough to remember seeing Roger Smee and Frank Waller in the stands at Elm Park as chairmen of the club.

Back then, Reading football club was an institution driven by its owners for the good of the club and for the fans. It promoted close links to the community and with its fans, built a great relationship with schools and was able to deliver premier football quality as well. That makes it more frustrating that it is now a stark contrast to what it was a decade ago and synonymous with the very worst of football club ownership.

Dai Yongge is not accessible to fans; nobody knows where he is. He has attempted to asset strip the club and is one of the clearest reasons why Reading football club is being held back from greater success. For example, alleged cash-flow issues under his ownership have caused the late payment of wages, resulting in points deductions.

People are just fed up with the way that the club is being run. Take, for example, the saga over Bearwood Park, Reading football club�s training ground in my constituency of Wokingham. This is a state-of-the-art facility that Dai Yongge attempted to sell in early 2024, with no consultation with fans on the decision. All he wanted to do was to get some cash for his business�for himself.

Sue Symes of Sell Before We Dai contacted me on a Thursday evening to ask what a clause in the training ground�s planning permission meant. At the time, I was a local councillor for Wokingham borough council. By lunch time the following day, I had a clear answer from council planners: the training ground development had been approved several years before, provided it belonged to Reading football club. Dai Yongge wanted to sell the training ground to Wycombe and further devalue the club. If the training ground was lost, the club was at a significant risk of having no alternative sites to train its squad.

I arranged for Reading FC and Wycombe to be reminded of the existence of that all-important clause, and within hours Wycombe had pulled out of the deal. That is just one battle that was won in a war that is hopefully close to concluding. I am pleased to acknowledge Sue Symes�s role in that.

Sue can rightly be proud of making sure that the sale of the club�s training ground did not happen, so that the club, the training ground and the stadium could all be sold as a viable concern. The club has been up for sale for more than 500 days, and it may have been close to selling several times. It will hopefully not be long before a sale actually happens, because Dai Yongge has bled the club dry and no one will deny that he must go.

The issue does not, unfortunately, end with Reading. Football clubs are not just luxury goods for millionaires to buy and sell like yachts; they are important to fans and are part of the DNA of their local communities. It is therefore good to see successive Governments bringing forward important legislation to establish an independent football regulator, which will provide a vital bulwark to protect our national game. I seriously hope that the new regulator will consider the case of Reading FC and other teams, such as Bury and Macclesfield Town, and take the time to speak to fans and learn the lived lessons of fans faced with an agonising process to retain their club�s assets and identity.

The Football Governance Bill is currently making its way through the other place. I want to record my support for the rules in the Bill requiring an assessment of the honesty and integrity of owners and officers. Importantly, the Bill also includes provisions to monitor owners and hold them accountable during their time in office, rather than just before they make their purchase. That will hopefully prevent any future Dai Yongge from taking root in a football club. I do, however, hope that the Bill will go further to protect assets beyond just stadiums. Protections should be extended to other club-owned assets, particularly training grounds but also car parks, hotels and other land owned by the club.

I would greatly appreciate it if the Minister answered a few questions. Will the independent football regulator, once set up, have any formal duty to engage with clubs that have faced hardships? What steps are the Government taking to strengthen the protection of club assets? Will the Minister reflect on whether the new Football Governance Bill, in its current form, would have prevented the takeover of Reading by Dai Yongge?

In conclusion, football is not just any other sport; it is an integral part of the fabric of our cities, towns and villages in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. That is what drives passion and desire among so many people. Quite simply, they want the five tiers of professional football to function because, from their perspective, if football cannot function, then how can society? Finally, I pay tribute to all those fans who have tirelessly campaigned on this issue, including the groups Sell Before We Dai and Supporters Trust at Reading, and people such as Sue Symes, Adam Jones and Ian Morton. They have all taken time from their personal lives to save a team about which they care deeply, and they are a wonderful example to our community.

[Karl Turner (in the Chair)]

I call the Opposition spokesperson.

14:32

[Mr Louie French (Old Bexley and Sidcup) (Con)]

It is a pleasure, as always, to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank the hon. Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) for securing this important debate. As we all know, football is more than just a game. It is a passion that unites millions across the country, from all backgrounds and communities. It is woven into the fabric of many communities, from grassroots clubs such as Foots Cray Lions and Welling United in my constituency of Old Bexley and Sidcup, to the premier league giants and those seeking to rival them.

Football and rugby were key to my own development as a teenager and although I do not get to play as often as I would like any more, sport taught me key life skills such as communication, teamwork and leadership, and taught me the positivity that comes from healthy competition. When I talk about football, it is personal to me. I want our beautiful game enjoyed for generations to come in the spirit of healthy competition. Football is nothing without its fans and the people who make football work throughout the year.

Although there are many debates to be had about the independent regulator in the months ahead, when the governance Bill finally returns to the Commons it is imperative that Members across the House do not lose sight of what a success story the evolution of English football is, in both the men�s and the women�s games. The premier league, for example, is the most watched competition in the world, attracting the best players and managers, and generating significant economic and cultural benefits to the United Kingdom. The EFL is also thriving, with attendances in the championship, league one and league two surpassing many European peers. But with the immense popularity and influence of this great British success story comes a responsibility for both the clubs and the governing bodies to ensure that the game remains viable, fair and open for future generations. In recent years, some clubs have suffered financial distress or, in the case of one of my local clubs, Charlton Athletic, they have been owned by someone who clearly did not have the club�s interests at heart.

Although we must be realistic about the global economics of football and the fierce competition from rival leagues, including the Saudi league, we cannot ignore the consequences on fans, communities and the wider football pyramid when clubs are run badly. I have great sympathy for Reading football club and the fans in the Public Gallery, because I see many similarities with the challenges that Charlton has faced in recent years. That is why the previous Government introduced a more measured, balanced and proportionate Football Governance Bill, which sought to ensure that English football was more financially sustainable for the future and more accountable to fans. It also sought to stop the breakaway European super league.

However, football clubs must live within their means. Clear and responsible financial frameworks are already in place within the premier league and the EFL, and are supposed to be overseen by the FA and the leagues. However, the FA is often overlooked in debates in this House�it has hardly been mentioned today�and in the other place, as many seem to forget that there are already many football regulations in place and that the FA and the leagues are the regulators. That is even before we consider the role of the likes of UEFA and FIFA, and we understand that UEFA has raised concerns with the Government about interference in our national sport.

[Peter Swallow]

The hon. Gentleman said that the previous Bill introduced by the Conservative Government was measured, and the Conservative party now opposes this version of the Bill. Could he state, really clearly for everyone here, what measures have changed that his party does not agree with?

[Mr French]

I am happy to answer that question. The Bill is still changing in the other place. The hon. Gentleman may not be aware, but amendments from the Conservative party have been accepted by the Government; I will come on to one of those amendments on growth of the game. I appreciate the enthusiasm of new Government Members as they try to please their Whips and the Government, but amendments are still being made to this Bill in the other place. I understand their eagerness, but we have not seen the final Bill.

There are challenges in football, but we must not lose sight of the importance of the independence of the sport. We must prevent Government interference, which will assuredly diminish the unique nature of the game and its ability to adapt to changing circumstances. A careful balance must be struck: regulation must not address just short-term issues; it should serve the sport�s long-term interests and it should not deter vital investment.

We should also acknowledge the progress in football governance over recent years. The Football Association, the Premier League and other key stakeholders have worked tirelessly to address issues such as financial fair play and racism and to improve safety standards at grounds. If we as legislators impose a blanket, top-down regulatory framework, we risk stifling the innovation and flexibility that has helped football to evolve. It was this innovation that allowed the premier league to come into existence in 1992, and that has provided world-class football in United Kingdom for more than three decades. It begs the question: would the premier league now be banned by this new Bill coming from the Labour party?

We cannot risk a return to the football of the 1980s, when English clubs were banned from Europe. Members may not be familiar with a letter from 2 September 2024 from the UEFA general secretary to the new Secretary of State raising concerns about the Bill. When we have requested sight of these concerns, the Government have denied us access. What are the Government hiding from football fans? Are there risks that our clubs, and even our national teams, may not be able to compete? Please can we have sight of this letter from UEFA raising these concerns? We have written to request it, and we have requested it in the other place. Members of Parliament must have complete transparency on what they are being asked to vote on and the risks of the Bill.

But it is not all own goals from the Labour party. It is welcome that this Government have now accepted some of the Conservative amendments in the other place. The hon. Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) asked a question about that, and I have an example for him: the Government�s regulator must now avoid any adverse effects on the financial growth of English football; we will closely monitor how it does that as the Bill develops. Equally, we have to be mindful of unintended consequences on clubs, fans and ticket prices. The Bill will increase the regulatory burden on all clubs. One football chief executive has already said:

�We�ve two choices with those costs. We either stop doing some of the things we�re already doing, whether that�s academy, women�s, girls� football or whatever, or we pass those costs on to fans.�

Members must acknowledge that football is a delicate international ecosystem that is at huge risk if the Government get this wrong. As we look around at the various challenges facing football today, from financial stability to governance issues and from player welfare to fan engagement, one thing becomes clear: football is at a crossroads. The time has come for us to empower the sport�s governing bodies to use their expertise to lead the way and chart a course that puts the game and fans first. As the official Opposition, we will continue to closely scrutinise what the Government�s expanded new Bill does, and try to limit the number of own goals they score.

14:40

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Stephanie Peacock)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) on securing this important debate. I begin by acknowledging that English football is world-leading. As well as sitting at the heart of communities up and down the country, English clubs have fans in every continent, and attract the best players from across the world. The premier league is one of our country�s best exports. Along with the EFL and the national league, it contributes billions of pounds to our economy and supports thousands of jobs, as has been outlined across the House in this debate. Its success and infrastructure support and inspire the next generation of footballing talent in English towns, villages and cities. It is because of this success that the Government want the sport to thrive for generations to come, securing the financial sustainability of the football pyramid.

My hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley, who represents Reading football club, has been a vocal supporter and campaigner on the governance and sustainability of football. She is right to raise those concerns. Reading, like so many of the other clubs that have been spoken about today, is an example of why this debate and the legislation are so important. Calls for change to secure the sustainability of football in this place date back to the cross-party Select Committee report of 2011. We then saw the ill fated super league attempt that resulted in the fan-led review. The review, led by former Conservative Sports Minister Dame Tracey Crouch, identified the need for an independent football regulator. I thank and pay tribute to her for her commitment and work. I have been pleased to be part of the women�s parliamentary football team with her, alongside so many other amazing women.

The previous Conservative Government published their Football Governance Bill�their legislation on this matter�on 18 March 2024, just less than a year ago. How time flies! That continued the cross-party consensus that existed until very recently. Members on the Government Benches and Conservative Benches were elected on manifestos that committed to bringing forward an independent football regulator. We on the Government side of the House are following through on that commitment and are on the side of football fans.

I will take this opportunity to address some of the specific questions put to me in this debate; if I cannot go into much detail, I will be happy to meet hon. Members. The hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) has taken a great interest in this subject. He asked about a second look. A new Government Lords amendment would require the Secretary of State to review the whole regime after five years. More specifically, if an owner were found to be unsuitable by the regulator, they would have the right to request a review of that decision. That review would be taken by the board. There is also a right to appeal to the Competition Appeal Tribunal.

[Dr Luke Evans]

The decision to take FA cup replays away, for example, was taken by the FA itself without any consultation; that is the difficulty. That is a prime example of the heritage of the game being taken away, and that mechanism would not quite address that. I will be happy to meet the Minister to talk through an idea that may well fit.

[Stephanie Peacock]

Great; I will be happy to meet the hon. Gentleman and I am really sympathetic to his points, but the Government cannot and do not want to be involved in all issues, and the regulator will not be able to cover them all. However, let us meet after the debate to discuss his ideas.

My hon. Friends the Members for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy) and Bracknell (Peter Swallow) mentioned non-league football. I visited Basingstoke during the general election. Non-league governance is for the FA, as I set out in the Adjournment debate secured last week by my hon. Friend the Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore). I appreciate all the challenges that have been outlined as I have seen them first hand in my own constituency. The Liberal Democrat spokesman, the hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones), posed a number of specific questions. I will not comment on individual cases, but I was pleased to meet him before Christmas and will address some of his points later in my speech.

To answer the shadow Minister�s specific question, I have met UEFA, we have a good relationship and it has not raised any issues. We do not publish private correspondence, just as his Government did not. Growth is central to this Government�s aims.

[James Wild]

I have to say that it is very curious that we know that this letter exists�it has been confirmed in the other place that it exists�and yet the Government repeatedly refuse to publish it, despite the potential impact that political interference with the governance of sport could have. Why does the Minister not just ask UEFA for permission to publish the letter and give it to Members?

[Stephanie Peacock]

The hon. Gentleman is an experienced Member of this House who I know spoke on Second Reading of the Bill. His Government, like this one, did not publish private correspondence, but I can absolutely assure the House that I have met UEFA and it does not have any issues.

As the Member of Parliament for Barnsley South, I know how important a club is to the community. Barnsley FC is a huge part of my town, and the community trust does amazing work, but Barnsley football club narrowly avoided administration 20 years ago. Football clubs mean everything to local people, with family, friends and neighbours coming together to watch games, win or lose. In turn, football would be nothing without its fans.

Hon. Members have spoken so well today about what clubs mean to their communities. We have heard from so many: Reading, Aylesbury United, Oxford United, Brighton and Hove, Luton Town, Grimsby Town, Norwich City, Chesterfield, Coventry City, Port Vale FC, Derby County FC, Morecambe FC, Carlisle United FC, Basingstoke Town, Bolton Wanderers, Bracknell Town, Mansfield Town and Weston-super-Mare. That really shows the strength of debate up and down this country and across this House. Despite bigger revenues than ever coming into the game, too many loyal fans have had their attention forced away from the pitch and into the troubles of malicious ownership, mishandled finances and ultimately the worry that their cherished clubs might be lost.

[Dan Aldridge]

While the Tories and Reform might be happy to see rogue owners running roughshod over fans and players across the country, does the Minister agree that this Labour Government will not allow fans to be taken for fools any longer?

[Stephanie Peacock]

My hon. Friend is right: the Government are on the side of football fans. That is why we have introduced the Football Governance Bill: to put fans back at the heart of the game.

[Mr French]

Given the last intervention and the ongoing auditions for Parliamentary Private Secretary roles among Labour Members, I must push the Minister: at what point will introducing a regulator and the measures that she is discussing lower ticket prices for football fans?

[Stephanie Peacock]

The hon. Gentleman should know that that is a commercial decision, but we have made a change so that fans will be consulted. We think that it is the right change. Our Football Governance Bill will put fans back at the heart of the game. It will protect club heritage, take on rogue owners and secure the financial sustainability of English football.

[Dr Luke Evans]

Will the Minister give way?

[Stephanie Peacock]

I have been very generous with my time and have already taken one intervention from the hon. Gentleman, so I will make progress.

Too many clubs have faced the precipice. There have been more than 60 instances of administration since 1992. That is simply unacceptable, so in the short time that I have left today I will turn to the detail of our legislation.

The Bill will introduce a new regulator for the game. It is intended to cover the top five levels of the men�s game. There will be strengthened tests for owners and directors. It will make clubs more financially resilient and will put fans back at the heart of their clubs. This is designed to be a light-touch regulator. At a very basic level, owners need to do three things: be an appropriate owner, have a sensible business plan and have proper engagement with fans on key issues. I will take each in turn.

Being an appropriate owner means that club custodians must be suitable; we are protecting fans from irresponsible owners. Having a sensible business plan means that clubs will need clear financial plans, with detail on risk management and resource plans for owners. Having proper engagement with fans on key issues means setting a minimum standard for fan engagement. We are ensuring protections on changes to club crests, home kit and club names and giving fans a voice in the day-to-day running of their club.

Clubs will need a licence to play. They will not be able to join closed-shop breakaway leagues or move around without proper consultation. A football-led solution is always the preferred outcome to financial distribution. In the Bill Committee on the previous Bill, Dame Tracey Crouch rightly said that

�distributions are an issue for football�

but that if no solution is found, it is

�important for backstop powers to be there to intervene���[Official Report, Football Governance Public Bill Committee, 21 May 2024; c. 234.]

If a football-led solution is not reached, the regulator will be ready to step up, if asked, to facilitate a solution as a last resort. The state of the game report will underpin that, informing the regulator�s work through a broad review of the financial health and economic issues in football at any given time.

As I have stated more than once, the Bill is very similar to its previous iteration, but we have made some moderate changes. Fans will have a greater voice and will be consulted on changes to ticket prices. We have brought more clarity and certainty to the backstop, so all issues relevant to redistribution can be considered. By removing the provision on following Government foreign policy, we are making the regime more independent.

The Bill is a historic piece of legislation that has been developed over several years, including by the previous Government, who recognised the need to regulate. Indeed, the Conservative manifesto said:

�We will introduce laws to ensure our fans never again face the threat of clubs in England joining breakaway closed-shop competitions and giving them more of a voice through the Independent Football Regulator.�

[Lizzi Collinge]

rose�

[James Wild]

rose�

[Stephanie Peacock]

I am about to conclude, so I will not give way.

I believe that the Bill will protect and promote the sustainability of English football in the interests of fans and the local communities it serves. Given the urgent issues that I and other hon. Members have highlighted today, we are determined to make sure that the regulator is up and running as soon as possible. I thank hon. Members for contributing to this huge debate, which has shown how much the House wants to see the regulator introduced.

14:51

[Yuan Yang]

I thank all hon. Members who have made speeches or interventions today. I also thank the Minister for her response and reassurance that she and this Government will continue to take seriously the real and pressing need for better football governance in this country. I am glad that she mentioned this Government�s amendments and additions to the Bill, particularly concerning fan consultation. I think we can all agree that we are here today in this Chamber because of the fans we represent.

Many hon. Members have brought up the social value of clubs and the community value that they bring to us. As my hon. Friend the Member for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge) pointed out, it is rare in any other walk of life to find a club that spans youth clubs and elderly people�s clubs and does work across the spectrum of ages and backgrounds. My hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) described how much of a presence her local club has in her town. My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent North (David Williams) spoke about how his local club, Port Vale, received an award for its community value, and he described the value of the cohesion that a football club can bring as a focal point for the community.

My hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge), who has worked at length with her local club the Shrimps, described how clubs can bring people together. I recognise that Morecambe football club faces a severely urgent need for an independent regulator. Because of that urgency, I was actually quite disappointed to hear the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French), describe the history of the Bill, but then sidestep that history and seem to oppose the current Bill. I also note that he did not respond to the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) about why he had changed his mind.

For many clubs across the country, we need regulation sooner rather than later, as my hon. Friends the Members for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson), for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East (Andy McDonald) and for Harlow (Chris Vince) pointed out. Every day we wait means another day that the staff of Reading football club forgo their wages and fans forgo certainty. My neighbour the hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones), who described this as a cross-party issue. I urge Opposition Members to maintain the cross-party consensus that was built over the last Parliament, when we all identified the need for independent football regulation.

I recognise the concerns voiced by the right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen) and the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Luke Evans) about the effects of a new regulator. I see where they are coming from, but I would argue that regulation can only increase international business confidence in the integrity of our football pyramid. There have been legal challenges already in the past few decades about the collective selling in the premier league, and I believe that better governance would reassure all those looking on that the public benefit argument has been sufficiently thought through.

More regulation would mean more stability across the pyramid and would prevent the situation we are in today, under which so many Members in this room have seen their local clubs go into administration, and which the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe) experienced when he was the chair of Southampton and it went into administration. For those clubs that have experienced administration, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) described, the impact on fans and on staff is immense. My hon. Friend the Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins) described how fans can rescue a club from administration, but so few manage to go down that route and emerge successfully.

My 90 minutes is drawing to a close, and there is no extra time for us in this match.

[James Wild]

Will the hon. Lady give way?

[Karl Turner (in the Chair)]

Order. Interventions are not taken in wind-ups.

[Yuan Yang]

The referee is very clear that I cannot give way.

I pay tribute to those hon. Members who mentioned the importance of non-league clubs and of Scottish clubs, which are not covered by English football regulation. However, given that this is a Backbench Business debate, as I remind the shadow Minister, we can cover all topics that we deem fit.

Football is not just a business, yet it has to endure as a business. Clubs are not just commodities; they are central to our community. I thank all fans watching this debate, in Parliament and beyond, and our local fan groups in Reading, Sell Before We Dai and the Supporters Trust at Reading.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the financial sustainability and governance of English football.

14:56

Sitting suspended.

Ambulance Response Times

Thursday 6th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Christine Jardine in the Chair]

15:00

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered ambulance service response times.

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Jardine. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for scheduling this important debate.

Unacceptable ambulance response times have become endemic in the UK, leaving people in pain and distress and costing lives. An estimated 50,000 people died last year after long A&E waits, according to Office for National Statistics data. One of those was Jim�s wife in Street. She was suffering from aggressive liver and bowel cancer and had to wait seven hours in agony for an ambulance in February last year. When the ambulance arrived, Jim and his wife were told that the crew were not trained to take her downstairs, so they were left to wait for another crew. When they arrived, several hours later, Jim�s wife was too ill to be moved and was told that the journey would kill her. She died shortly after.

Jim told me again today how that experience still makes him angry, yet he recognises the perilous state that the NHS is in, caused largely by the last Conservative Government. Like Jim, many people have lost faith in health services after the NHS was stretched and left grossly underfunded as a result of the last Conservative Government�s neglect.

We know that this is having a devastating impact on patients, but it is also impacting the incredibly hard-working medical staff. The 2023 NHS staff survey showed that 39% of ambulance staff respondents often or always felt burnt out. The number is higher for control room staff, at 44%, and higher still for ambulance technicians and paramedics, at 45%. I am sure that Members across the House will join me in thanking and paying tribute to everyone working in the ambulance service whose hard work, dedication and commitment to patient safety is second to none.

Most people in Somerset will sadly know of someone who has faced a heartbreakingly long wait for an ambulance. The family of an 89-year-old Somerton resident told me how they faced a 10-hour wait, stuck in agony on the floor, as no ambulances could come to help them. Another resident told me about their ordeal of having to prop their mother up on the toilet after she had had a fall. They then had to spend 13 long hours waiting for an ambulance to arrive. I am sure other Members will have similar heartbreaking examples.

It is important to understand the context of these examples, so I will briefly outline the NHS targets: seven minutes for category 1 calls, for which 90% of ambulances should arrive within 15 minutes; 18 minutes for category 2 calls, for which 90% of ambulances should arrive within 40 minutes; while 90% of ambulances for category 3 and 4 calls should arrive within two and three hours respectively.

Those targets remain unmet in the south-west, where we have the worst-performing ambulance service in the country. In January 2025, South Western Ambulance Service failed to meet the targets for category 1 and 2 calls. The average time it took to respond to a category 2 call was 51 minutes and 45 seconds�nearly three times slower than the NHS target. This has serious repercussions for people�s health. In every minute that a stroke is left untreated, nearly 2 million brain cells die, and lifesaving treatments such as clot-busting drugs need to be delivered quickly, often within four and a half hours.

I have heard from many constituents across Glastonbury and Somerton who are deeply concerned by the delays in stroke treatment due to ambulance waiting times. These fears are compounded by the planned closure of Yeovil district hospital�s hyper-acute services. The reconfiguration of services will mean that all patients who have suffered a serious life-threatening stroke will be taken to hyper-acute stroke units in Dorchester or Taunton to receive care.

As much as these new cutting-edge services and facilities are welcome in the south-west, the fact remains that if stroke patients or any patient needing emergency treatment gets to hospital too late, the results will be catastrophic without improvements to the ambulance service, and all the best equipment, drugs and treatment by clinicians will have minimal impact on patient outcomes. I have spoken about the impact of these changes on stroke care in this place before. I do not feel it necessary to go into detail again today, suffice to say that ambulance delays only increase the pressure on stroke services. The Liberal Democrats have demanded that localised data on ambulance delays is published, so rural areas like Somerset that are underperforming can receive focused and appropriate support. I would welcome the Minister�s comments on that.

Lengthy delays are made all the worse when we consider the impact of drawn-out handover times, meaning ambulance crews are unable to head back out on to the road to pick up more patients. The Darzi review laid bare just how dire the situation has become. In 2024, around 800 working days each day were lost due to handover delays. Incredibly, that is the full-time equivalent of nearly 14,000 paramedics over a year. In addition, ambulances across England collectively spent 112 years waiting outside hospitals to hand over patients in 2023-24.

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

I was in my local hospital, Queen�s medical centre in Nottingham, where they are currently trialling 45-minute handovers, to make sure that paramedics get back on the road as quickly as possible, while also making sure that patients are safely handed over into the target speciality care they need. Does the hon. Member welcome that sort of trial, given the challenges she describes?

[Sarah Dyke]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I will come to that point a little later.

With the stark realities facing people in an emergency and the distressing sight of ambulances backed up at hospitals now commonplace, leaving my constituents in Glastonbury and Somerton in despair, it is time to properly address these failures. The NHS standard contract states that handovers between ambulance and emergency departments should be 100% within 60 minutes, 95% within 30 minutes and 65% within 15 minutes, but these targets are left unmet. Between October 2023 and June 2024, 3.7 million handovers took an average of 35 minutes and one second, resulting in over 900,000 hours lost. It is even worse in the south-west. In January 2025, over half the handovers took over 30 minutes, which is nearly 30% higher than the England average.

We in the south-west face specific issues due to our rurality. Analysis by the Liberal Democrats revealed that waits for life-threatening calls were 45% longer in rural areas than in urban areas. The South Western Ambulance Service has responsibility for the provision of ambulance services across 10,000 square miles, covering an incredible 20% of mainland England. Rural regions have a lower capacity to divert ambulances to other hospitals during periods of significant pressure, largely due to the vast distances between emergency departments.

We may now see ambulance teams in Somerset adopt a �drop and go� policy, which involves leaving patients in certain areas in a hospital without an official handover to A&E staff. The nationally defined target for hospitals included in the NHS standard contract states that after 15 minutes of waiting, the patient in the ambulance becomes the responsibility of the hospital. If no formal handover to A&E happens within 45 minutes, the ambulance crews can just leave the patient within the department and get back on the road.

The South West Ambulance Service is moving towards this approach with hospitals from Swindon and Bristol to Cornwall and Plymouth. Although this policy might alleviate some of the pressure on ambulance crews, it would fail to ease the struggles that underfunded and overstretched A&E departments in Somerset are facing. Somerset has an ageing population: within the next decade, one in three people in Glastonbury and Somerton will be 65 or older. That may make it harder to quickly discharge patients, as some may also require onward social care provision. It is inevitable, therefore, that delayed discharge due to internal processes such as waiting for pharmacy diagnostics and therapy assessments, and a lack of capacity in adult social care, will lead to poorer ambulance service performance. The social care crisis has a devastating effect on the healthcare system.

Last year, Care England said that

�over 45% of hospital discharge delays are linked to social care�.

One in seven hospital beds are taken up by people who are medically fit to be discharged. For patients, delayed discharge can lead to an increased risk of hospital infections and the loss of mobility or cognitive function, and can make it harder for them to regain their independence. The problems in the healthcare system will never be fixed unless we urgently address the social care crisis. Only last week, social care providers felt the need to protest against Government inaction for the first time ever.

The Liberal Democrats have been campaigning to fix social care by introducing free personal care based on the model introduced in Scotland, so that provision is based on need, not ability to pay. We also welcome the cross-party commission to forge a long-term agreement on social care, but we believe it can be completed within a year, not three. We cannot afford to kick this can any further down the road, and I urge the Government to listen to the Liberal Democrats� calls.

We also need to solve the hospital bed shortage in the UK. The lack of available beds negatively impacts hospital flow. As a comparison, the OECD EU nations have about five beds per 1,000 people, whereas the UK has only 2.4. The Royal College of Physicians revealed that four out of five doctors were forced to provide corridor care in the past month due to a lack of hospital beds. According to the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, bed occupancy is at a staggering 93%. The Liberal Democrats want to bring that down to a safe 85% by increasing the number of staffed hospital beds.

We are waiting for the Government to publish the urgent and emergency care improvement plan soon, along with the 10-year health plan. It is vital that we urgently wrestle with the problems that the Conservatives left behind to ensure the safety of patients. Over the past seven years, the previous Conservative Government were forced to find an average of �376 million of emergency funding each year to tackle the NHS winter crises. Under the Liberal Democrat proposals, a new winter taskforce would instead manage a ringfenced fund of �1.5 billion over the next four years to build resilience in hospital wards, accident and emergency departments, ambulance services and patient discharging. That would allow integrated care boards and NHS trusts to plan their budgets more effectively to prevent winter crises, instead of just receiving emergency funding from the Government at the last minute.

We urgently need to give our healthcare services the ability to forward plan. They must not be forced to deal with crises on the fly as situations unfold. Somerset�s ambulance services, like all services across the country, desperately need and deserve support. Localised data must be published to help pinpoint specific improvements that can be made in rural areas. The Government have outlined their desire to improve urgent and emergency care�they accept that ambulance waiting times are unacceptable�but now is the time to act to achieve those objectives; otherwise, more people will suffer and sadly some lives will be lost. That must be part of a serious rethink about the way we fund social care; otherwise, we will never move towards a solution that works.

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

I remind Members they should bob if they wish to be called to speak in the debate.

15:14

[Jas Athwal (Ilford South) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. I thank the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing this much-needed debate.

It is incumbent on us to get the waiting times down to the level that we all expect because in a medical emergency every second counts. Every minute without the right care could mean the difference between life or death, independence or disability, full recovery or a lifetime of complications. Yet, across nearly all categories, ambulances are failing to meet their target response times. They are often stuck waiting instead of saving lives, held up by staff shortages or gridlocked outside hospitals with no beds to offload patients. I know this from personal experience because my health trust suffers from it more than most in London. We all have a stake in improving our NHS. We all want to see more beds, more timely treatment and a healthcare system that keeps our friends, neighbours and families healthier for longer.

Last year, Labour�s Budget unlocked �22.6 billion in funding for the NHS over the next two years to pay our doctors fairly, to provide critical hospital beds, and to end the backlog, but for emergency services there remains a critical issue that pumping money into the NHS alone will not fix: staff shortages. Paramedics have one of the highest turnover rates of any profession. Although the number of paramedics has increased since March 2018, absence caused by poor mental health has also increased and so has the number of staff leaving the field all together. Between 2022 and 2023, nearly 7,000 paramedics left their jobs�a 51% increase in leavers from 2019-2020. Without enough staff, ambulances cannot operate at full capacity and response times suffer.

In the current state of the NHS, paramedics are overworked, stretched to the limit and living with the consequences of underfunding and lack of support. Burnout is not just a risk; it is their reality. Who can blame paramedics for wanting to leave? Let us be clear: we have reached this point not because paramedics are not working hard enough, because they are, but because the emergency services have become a safety net. Without preventive measures such as screening, GP appointments or adequate social care, patients get treated only when their condition has escalated to a true emergency, putting undue stress on services. When patients can be treated only once their condition has become an emergency, it is a failure of the system and it increases pressure on our emergency services. It is a bad deal for patients and for those working tirelessly in our emergency services�a deal made possible by 14 years of Tory mismanagement, underfunding and neglect.

If we want better health outcomes and to meet our response time targets, we must make bold structural changes. We need to ensure that paramedics are not carrying the burden of overstretched services in every corner of the NHS. We must ensure that all parts of the NHS function well, from community screenings to adequate support for paramedics, who should be able to continue in their roles and not be driven out because the system has made it unbearable to stay. Every minute counts for overworked paramedics at breaking point and the patients who desperately need their care. I look to the Minister to do the heavy lifting and fix the broken system, which will be the difference between life and death.

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

I call Nicholas Timothy.

15:19

[Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)]

Thank you, Ms Jardine, for calling me to speak and also for giving me my full name, Nicholas�I think the last time that was done was when I was six years old and in trouble with my mother.

I applaud the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing this very important debate. I think we can all agree that this is an important issue not only for our constituents, but for every community across the country. As we have just heard, the time it takes for an ambulance to reach people in need of urgent medical care can make all the difference in saving lives. We have a responsibility to engage constructively across party lines to find solutions that work.

Since the pandemic hit, we have all seen the challenges faced by our local health services, and ambulances are no exception. In January, average response times for the two highest priority incidents missed NHS targets. Official data shows average response times for category 1 incidents of eight minutes and 16 seconds, instead of the seven-minute target, and average response times for category 2 incidents of 35 minutes and 40 seconds, instead of the 18-minute target.

Even those statistics obscure dramatic variation across the country. This is particularly concerning in my constituency of West Suffolk. Haverhill, our biggest town, has a population of 30,000 people, but the response times for the highest priority incidents in Haverhill are twice as long as they are in Cambridge. Figures from the NHS England weekly ambulance scorecard show that in the 12-month period to the end of September, Cambridge�s average response time for category 1 incidents was 7.3 minutes, just missing the national target, but Haverhill�s was 14.7 minutes. Ambulances starting their shifts in Haverhill are often dispatched towards Cambridge, which is 15 miles away at its nearest point. This is an inequality that needs to be addressed as soon as possible.

The problem arises in part from the fact that Haverhill ambulance station is located right on the county boundary, at the edge of south Cambridgeshire. The ambulance station is used for maintenance, but it does not have its own ambulances on standby. This appears to have a negative effect on how ambulances are assigned for the local area, with resources sucked into Cambridgeshire and staying there. Addenbrooke�s hospital has become a hotspot for this problem: ambulances with patients waiting to be treated wait outside for long periods, instead of responding to more incidents in and around Haverhill.

I have spoken to the East of England Ambulance Service several times over the past few months to learn more about the situation. It believes that the system status plan, which decides where to send ambulances, should be changed so that Haverhill becomes a priority and more ambulances can be sent there.

Since my election, I have also been making the case for a co-located and purpose-built blue light facility in the town. This would allow the local police, fire and rescue service, and ambulance service to better serve local residents and save taxpayers� money. The plan has the support of local councillors and several interested parties, and the Government have also made positive comments about adopting this approach nationally. I look forward to the publication of the Government�s urgent and emergency care improvement plan, as well as the 10-year health plan.

I remind the Minister of the Health Secretary�s commitment, which he made on the Floor of the House, to follow up with me regarding this proposal. Since the Health Secretary made that commitment, I have not received a response to my letter. I hope that a Minister or appropriate official from the Department will come to visit us in West Suffolk. It would be an excellent opportunity for them to meet representatives of the East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust, officers from Suffolk police, the Suffolk police and crime commissioner, and the fire and rescue service to discuss the next steps.

I hope that today�s debate will provide us all with an opportunity to work together to improve ambulance services. I know that the problems that I have described in West Suffolk exist in other parts of the country, and we have much to learn from one another. There are solutions that can be implemented to deliver faster response times and improve outcomes for our constituents. I look forward to supporting any practical measures to help achieve exactly that.

15:24

[Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. I congratulate the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) on securing today�s important debate.

I welcome the news that ambulance waiting times are slowly improving in my area of the west midlands, but I would like to raise an issue that has been brought to me by several of my constituents in very distressing circumstances: how long those ambulances are having to wait outside A&E departments.

An ambulance service needs hospital services that can support it, and my constituents deserve to know that if they need urgent healthcare, an ambulance will turn up quickly and be able to deliver them to the appropriate care as soon as possible. At the moment, that is simply not happening: 66.6% of ambulances at Worcestershire Royal hospital, which serves many of my constituents, were left waiting longer than 30 minutes in the first week of January 2025. Prior to that, in October, only 50% of people attending any of the trust�s A&E departments, including mine in Redditch, were treated, admitted, or discharged within four hours. That same month, 1,300 ambulance patients waited more than an hour outside. I would like to share what that means in reality for some of my constituents.

My constituent Connie�s mother was sat in the back of an ambulance for hours outside the Royal, waiting for space to go in. Once she was finally admitted, she was left in a chair in a corridor for even longer. Not only is that a distressing situation for the patient, but while she was unable to be admitted, that ambulance was forced to stay outside and not be redeployed to help others. I heard from another constituent, Elaine, who had to call an ambulance for her 80-year-old mother-in-law due to a serious hypoglycaemic event, and although the ambulance crew were prompt in their arrival, she spent seven hours in the back of an ambulance as the A&E was not in a position to take her. She then spent 48 hours in A&E and a further three weeks in hospital before she was discharged, having received excellent care, but it is those seven hours that still stay with her now.

At the Alexandra hospital in my constituency, there are no in-patient children�s beds, so very sick children have to be taken to Worcestershire by ambulance if they need to be admitted. The Minister knows all too well that I have raised this issue with her before. If these services were provided more locally, over more than one site, ambulances would be freed up to deal with truly urgent cases across Worcestershire. Our ambulance and hospital staff work tirelessly to help us stay safe and well, but they are being let down by a system that has been neglected for too long.

I will not make a party political point, but�let�s be honest�we pay for the service we get. As the son of someone who worked in the NHS for 40 years, I would say that for too long we have not been investing in our health and social care systems in this country. We must take action now to ensure that our hospitals are given the resources they need so that handovers from ambulances can take place quickly and safely, and patients can truly receive the care that they deserve.

15:27

[Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) on securing this important debate.

From the January 2024 figures, we can see that the South Western Ambulance Service consistently ranked near the bottom across all categories of ambulance response times. The mean response times were nearly all below NHS targets, and the longest category 4 response was over nine hours against a target of three. The geography of rural Devon, and particularly of my constituency of South Devon, is not conducive to speedy ambulance response times�I would challenge anyone to drive along our hedge-lined rural lanes at speed, even with a blue light flashing�so it is no wonder that figures might be lower than national NHS targets dictate, but while ambulances spend hours waiting at clogged A&E departments, they are not out on the road responding to patients.

I will focus particularly on two areas. The first is the very worrying issue of the proposed relocation of out-of-hours emergency cardiac services from Torbay Hospital to Exeter, which is being proposed by Getting It Right First Time�a programme that claims to present

�a data-driven evidence base to support change.�

Patients in Torbay and South Devon currently face significant delays with ambulances already struggling to meet response time targets, but with the relocation of cardiology services, ambulances will have to travel an extra 20 miles to Exeter after collecting and stabilising a patient, and for those who live in the furthest southern part of my constituency�Dartmouth, for example�this is a significant extra travel time to add to what is already quite a long and slow journey. That extra travel time will delay critical interventions for heart attack patients. For every 30-minute delay to treatment, there is a 7.5% increase in mortality. In other words, that is 15 people out of every 200 who could lose their life because of an extra half-hour delay.

Last week, a dozen cardiologists at Torbay hospital met me and other local MPs. They told us that they have been calling on the local ICB for a year not to go through with the change and that, crucially, no evidence has been presented in a case that would justify the move. They said that even 10 to 15 minutes can literally save a life. We know that quicker response times also mean a better chance of full recovery for patients who get to hospital in time to survive. Most worryingly, South Western Ambulance Service did not know anything about the proposed move. It feels appropriate, while we are discussing ambulance services, to say that that strikes me as wholly unacceptable for a body that wants to �get it right�.

There is growing support for treating strokes as category 1 emergencies, on a par with conditions such as cardiac arrest, due to their time-sensitive nature, which my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton described. Quicker responses could significantly improve long-term outcomes, reducing the risk of permanent disability or death. The first three hours are critical for intervention as brain tissue continues to deteriorate after that. Faster treatment helps to prevent that damage. Although strokes are in category 2, evidence shows that response times often exceed the ideal timeframe. The average time it takes for an ambulance to arrive and provide care for category 2 calls is often well beyond the optimal window for effective stroke treatment.

In the south-west, the mean time for an ambulance to respond to a cat 2 call was nearly 52 minutes, against an NHS target of just 18 minutes. The longest time was one hour and 53 minutes. Changing the categorisation of stroke could ensure that ambulances prioritise stroke victims as they would a cardiac arrest or a trauma case, which could improve response times and overall care. That would put yet more pressure on ambulance services but, after all the public education campaigns about recognising stroke symptoms�which are very welcome�ambulances are simply not arriving in time to provide the necessary treatment.

Our paramedics and ambulance services have so much to offer, from providing lifesaving urgent medical care to delivering care in the community and driving welcome innovation for the NHS. Yet according to official NHS figures, in the winter of 2023-24 ambulances across England collectively spent a staggering total of 112 years waiting outside hospitals to hand patients over. It is an astonishing and dangerous waste of resources for ambulances to be stuck for hours waiting outside crammed A&Es. As my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton said, the crisis in our social care system goes a long way to exacerbating bed blocking in hospitals, which is having a direct impact on ambulance services.

The Liberal Democrats are calling on the Government to publish accessible, localised reports of ambulance response times and create an emergency fund to reverse closures of community ambulance stations�which are particularly vital in rural areas�and cancel planned closures where needed. We need a proper plan to fund this crucial part of our NHS, rather than last-minute emergency funding each year during repeated winter crises, which does not enable local trusts and ICBs to plan effectively and efficiently.

15:33

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine.

NHS England has set ambulance response time targets since 2018. As the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) indicated, there are four categories of severity for ambulance calls, each with a different response-time standard. In my Wolverhampton West constituency, ambulance response times are managed by the West Midlands Ambulance Service. The Care Quality Commission�s 2023 inspection of the West Midlands Ambulance Service resulted in a regulation 12 notice for response times.

I pay tribute to ambulance workers, who work very hard. When the ambulance was called for my parents, before they passed away, the ambulance workers were very diligent. They worked very hard and did their best for my parents.

I wish to address an issue raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal): mental health among ambulance workers. Sadly, it has come to my attention as the MP in Wolverhampton West that there have been cases of bullying and harassment among ambulance workers, with whistleblowers then being targeted by management. Although I appreciate that this is probably a discussion for another time, I want to emphasise that we need to protect whistleblowers in our health service. The wellbeing of ambulance workers will have an impact on ambulance response times.

The Black Country integrated care system covers my constituency of Wolverhampton West. On the four categories for ambulance response times, although the ICS�s response time for category 1 was found to be within target, the response times for categories 2, 3 and 4 were under target.

In January this year, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care acknowledged that patients have been let down by ambulances that do not arrive on time, and that there is variation in performance across different parts of the country. He also mentioned the urgent and emergency care improvement plan, which is currently in production and will be published before spring 2025. I look forward to seeing the results.

The Government�s mandate to NHS England this year includes an objective to reform and improve urgent and emergency care. The mandate describes ambulance response times and A&E waiting times as unacceptable. NHS England�s priorities and operational planning guidance includes a national priority to improve A&E waiting and ambulance response times.

As a Government we have made excellent strides in reducing hospital waiting lists and making more hospital appointments available, and we have improved accessibility to GP appointments. In the same way as we have made strides in reducing hospital waiting lists and increasing hospital appointments, we must now make similar strides in improving ambulance response times.

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

15:37

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Jardine. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing this important debate and for opening it with, as usual, a thoughtful and well-researched contribution.

It is no surprise that Members have largely been in agreement in this debate, and they have made useful contributions, so I will quickly run through them. The hon. Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) importantly highlighted the issue of burnout and the impact of the current situation on hard-working staff in the ambulance service, and the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy) highlighted the huge regional variations and the inequality of service for people who live in very rural areas.

The hon. Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore) told a story�which would be familiar to people in Shropshire�of long handover delays; my hon. Friend the Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) mentioned the importance of dealing with stroke patients and seeing them quickly; and the hon. Member for Wolverhampton West (Warinder Juss), with whom my constituents and I share the West Midlands Ambulance Service, highlighted some of our concerns with that service as a whole.

I was first elected in the North Shropshire by-election back in December 2021. All that time ago, when my colleagues and I were out canvassing, it was extremely apparent that ambulance service delays were the No. 1 issue for my constituents. Every canvassing session we did, somebody heard an absolutely heartbreaking story of an ambulance delay that had led to a much worse outcome for a loved one, or possibly even a death. In all honesty, it was a shocking campaigning issue to have to focus on.

Almost a year later, after being elected, I completed a shift with West Midlands Ambulance Service in Shropshire, and I was blown away by the professionalism, dedication and hard work of the ambulance crew. But suffice it to say, the delays were still as appalling as they had been a year before.

Since then, there has been huge political turmoil, and that has not helped the situation. There have been four Prime Ministers, six Secretaries of State for Health and Social Care, and two Governments, and I am afraid to say we are still not seeing the improvement that we need. This winter, handover and waiting times reached the point where in some ambulance services people suffering heart attacks were at times advised to drive themselves to hospital. That is an unacceptable situation.

The most recent available data for my local ambulance service in Shropshire�the rural element of the West Midlands Ambulance Service�goes up to December 2024, and it still paints a stark picture of the distressing reality facing my constituents and people across Shropshire. The mean waiting time for category 1 callouts was 12 minutes 19 seconds, while the target is seven minutes. For category 2 callouts, the mean waiting time was 50 minutes and 36 seconds, while the target is 18 minutes. Those categories include callouts to people suffering from heart attacks and suspected strokes. For category 3 callouts, the mean waiting time was well over 200 minutes, and the target is an hour. After a long campaign, �21 million was secured to boost emergency care, and there has been improvement, but response times are still totally unacceptable.

At times, as many as 16 ambulances have been queuing outside the Shrewsbury and Telford emergency departments that serve my constituents. More than one in three ambulances have to wait for more than an hour to hand over a patient, and the longest wait was an astonishing 17 hours. Even this week, as we approach the spring, a constituent told me they had stopped to help an elderly lady laying on a cold pavement with a suspected stroke and had had to wait nearly an hour and a half for an ambulance or first responder to arrive. All the while, the lady�s breath become more and more shallow. This crisis is real, and it has not significantly improved.

Let us look at the national picture. The Darzi report found that each day in 2024 around 800 working days were lost to handover delays. However we cut that�14,000 paramedics a year; 112 years�it is just not acceptable. It is no surprise that people have lost faith in emergency health services as a result of the last Government�s appalling neglect of the NHS. The paramedics, nurses and doctors in our emergency departments go above and beyond, but they are stretched to breaking point and are unfortunately starting to leave the service because of burnout. We are campaigning to end excessive handover delays by increasing the number of staffed hospital beds and by tackling the impact of degrading corridor care.

Let me focus for a moment on social care. Crucially, A&E delays are often caused by an inability to admit patients because thousands of people are stuck in hospital every day when they would be better cared for elsewhere. Bed occupancy is well above safe levels in hospitals, and one in seven hospital beds are occupied by somebody who would be better cared for either in a care home or in their own home. Meanwhile, local authorities such as Shropshire are spending as much as 80% of their budget on social care. They are at risk of issuing section 114 notices as they are unable to cope any longer.

It is really important that we get on with the cross-party talks on social care and with the Casey review. We in the Liberal Democrat party absolutely welcome that, but we urge the Government to speed up the timetable and crack on with it as soon as possible, because 2028 is too late for a long-term solution for social care. The cross-party talks that fell through last week need to be reinstated. I urge the Minister to encourage the Secretary of State to do that as soon as possible.

Let us focus for a moment on the rural problem. Imagine an ideal scenario in which the issue of handover delays has been resolved, the urgent and emergency care plan has been successfully implemented and the 10-year plan has sorted out other issues across the NHS. For those who live near Oswestry, Whitchurch or Market Drayton in my constituency, the nearest community ambulance station has closed and the nearest station or hospital is well over 20 minutes away�that is, if the traffic is clear. Otherwise, if the response time targets for category 1 or 2 calls is to be met, they are reliant on a spare ambulance roaming free in the community, waiting for that call to come in. That is unrealistic. We would expect and hope that, in between calls, paramedics would go and have a cup of tea and a sit down, to decompress from some of the awful things they have seen that day, if they do not have a patient to go to immediately. Hopefully, they go back to the ambulance station in between call-outs.

The implementation of this centralised model across the country is detrimental to the people who live a long way from an ambulance station. It may well be efficient in urban areas, but it certainly is not working in rural ones. I hope the Minister will commit to reviewing the service that is received in rural places. There are thousands of people in large market towns. For example, Oswestry has nearly 8,000 residents, Market Drayton has more than 12,000 and Whitchurch has nearly 10,000. These people expect to receive an ambulance within the target time. I must urge the Minister to commit to looking at ambulance station provision in those areas. I also repeat my colleagues� calls for the Government to publish accessible, localised reports on response times and to create an emergency fund to reverse the closures of community ambulance stations that have already taken place.

The Midlands Air Ambulance Charity does fantastic work across the west midlands and is one of the busiest air ambulance charities in the country. It does not have an NHS contract; it is entirely reliant on the contributions of people living locally. I wonder whether the Minister might consider putting air ambulance services on a statutory footing, because we are so dependent on them, particularly when specialist hospitals might be a long way away and air ambulance crews supply specialist support to stabilise patients where they are found, at the roadside or in their home.

The situation is unacceptable, and I look forward to seeing the urgent and emergency care plan, which I hope it will consider the needs of rural areas. I must urge the Minister to look at social care, because that is one of the key things we need to do to fix the crisis in the NHS.

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

I call the Opposition spokesperson.

15:46

[Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. I thank the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing a debate on this important subject. I pay tribute to the ambulance services and to paramedics and their colleagues, who are on the frontline of our healthcare service, today and every day. Regardless of the weather, or whether it is a bank holiday, they are always there for all of us.

In my medical career, I have been required to deliver full intensive care to children, and particularly babies, who were being transferred across the county in East Midlands ambulances throughout the night and day. I have hurtled along in the back of an ambulance as it travelled down country roads, around corners and down the hard shoulder of motorways, so I understand some of what ambulance crews do. That has given me a deep appreciation of their work, and highlighted to me some of the unique challenges and pressures they face, particularly in our rural areas.

Before I was elected, I had two experiences of delayed ambulance services. On one occasion, I was driving up the A1 when the gentleman in the car in front of me skidded on some water and went into a tree. I am sorry to say that the ambulance took a very long time to arrive, and he died shortly afterwards. There was a fire truck, police officers and an incident manager, but there was no ambulance service. I do not think it would have made a difference to the outcome, but in other cases it might have.

On another occasion, I was sat in traffic when a police officer knocked on the window, which is always slightly worrying. They were looking for a doctor because they had been waiting so long for an ambulance for the people in the accident that was causing the traffic. It took a further 40 minutes from me arriving at the scene for the ambulance to arrive�I am not clear how long the people at the scene had been waiting before. So this issue was a great priority for me before I became a Member of Parliament.

In my first question at Prime Minister�s Question Time, in January 2017, I thanked the East Midlands Ambulance Service for its brave and stellar work serving the people of Sleaford and North Hykeham, and asked for ambulance service response times to be a priority. I also raised the issue in my first meetings with the then Prime Minister and Health Secretary. I understand that response times have improved somewhat, at different periods with different initiatives but overall, as we have heard, they are not where we need them to be.

In January, a constituent wrote to my office detailing the difficult experience of waiting too long for an ambulance to arrive. This 85-year-old gentleman came downstairs at 10 am to find his 82-year-old wife, who suffers from advanced dementia, lying on the hardwood floor, covered in blood, crying and confused. He managed to get her into a chair, calm her down and call 999. The operator could not hear him properly because the phone service was bad, his wife was crying and trying to get out of the chair, and he was struggling. Eventually, he was told the ambulance would be there in 12 hours. The ambulance did eventually arrive, and his wife is now in a stable condition, but that was a traumatising experience for her and the 85-year-old man. I was sorry to read that harrowing tale, and tales like it are too common across the country. I am interested in what the Minister will do to improve the situation; it is easy to say that things are not where they need to be, but it is important to consider how one can improve them, and that is what I hope to hear from her.

Of course, the pandemic threw everything off kilter, and demand for ambulance services rose significantly, with almost 3 million calls in March 2020. In 2022-23, an extra �150 million was allocated to improve ambulance response times through extra call handler recruitment and retention. In January 2023, to improve performance further, the last Government published an urgent and emergency care plan, which set out ambitions to improve average ambulance response times for category 2 incidents to 30 minutes over 2023-24, with further improvement in 2024-25 to get back towards pre-pandemic levels. The plan aimed to increase ambulance capacity by making over 800 new ambulances available during 2023-24, including 100 new specialist mental health vehicles for those who require different types of service. However, in December 2024, under this Government, ambulance response times rose to an average of three hours and two minutes for category 3 calls�category 3 covers elderly people who suffer falls but not a head injury. What steps will the Government take with NHS England to reduce those response times so that people are not waiting hours in pain and discomfort?

I have said to the Minister that it is important that we talk about how we can improve things, as well as about what the problems are. It is crucial that we all do that, and one suggestion from my hon. Friend the Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy) was co-located blue-light services�I am sure he is aware that the first such services were opened not long ago in Lincolnshire. The blue light hub tri-service centre, in the Lincoln constituency, is a co-located site, and co-location is leading to improvements in services. Although that is not my constituency, I am sure the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer) would be open to an approach if my hon. Friend wished to see the site.

It is important to look at risk all along the pathway. We have talked about handover delays, but there is a whole pathway from the moment someone calls 999 to the transfer journey, the wait to get into A&E and then the wait in A&E. The risk is clearly highest at the point where someone has called 999 but does not yet have access to on-site or in-person medical care. To improve that, we need more ambulances on the road and fewer sat outside A&E.

I have some questions for the Minister. Ambulances are double-crewed�there are two people in the ambulance �but do two staff need to stay with the patient? If two ambulances have arrived, each with two staff and one patient, could two of the four crew go off in one of the ambulances to see more patients? That would avoid a situation where there are two staff per patient in the ambulance, when many patients are not that unwell medically. Nursing in intensive care is only one to one, but we are providing higher levels of care than that with these staffing ratios. Is that necessary?

We also have a delay in handover�in getting people out of the ambulances�because the A&E is said to be full. The front door is open, but the back door, for people coming in an ambulance, is in effect closed. If patients got out of the ambulance and walked round the building to the front door, they could go in and be triaged as normal. It does not make sense. Some of my medical colleagues have gone to see people in the ambulance and discharged them from there, without their needing to come into the hospital at all. So there are clearly people with a level of medical acuity that would potentially allow the crew, with guidance and training, to discharge them into the front door of the hospital instead.

On another question, if some people are well enough to be discharged from ambulances, are the public sufficiently aware of what constitutes a necessity when it comes to calling an ambulance? How many ambulances that are called are necessary? One would not wish to deter anyone who is frightened and concerned for their wellbeing from calling an ambulance if they feel they need one, but education on when one is needed might be useful.

As has been alluded to, staff retention is also important. One o constituent�a single mum with children�left her role as a paramedic because she was struggling with working hours that overlapped with getting her children ready for school in the morning. She was able to cover most other aspects of childcare�such as picking them up from school�with after-school clubs and the like, but she struggled in a morning, and her flexible working request was refused. I recognise that there must be balance, and that all hours of the day must be covered by ambulances, but has the Minister thought about how working practices and hours could be changed?

The Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan), mentioned resources in rural areas. That is important because response times will necessarily be increased by the geography, so greater levels of resource perhaps need to be provided to rural areas, in recognition of the fact that if we want response times in them to fall, we need a higher level of ambulance availability.

Another significant factor causing delayed ambulance response times is staff sickness, which is not necessarily an issue of NHS funding. Ambulance services in England report the highest level of sickness absence rates of any other profession across the NHS. Against a national average absence rate of 4.3% over an eight-year period, ambulance staff showed an average absence rate of 6.2%, with year-on-year increases. There are stark regional differences in sickness rates, with the West Midlands Ambulance Service consistently maintaining a lower absence rate�around 50% lower than its counterparts in London or the east midlands. The NHS would benefit from sharing best practices between trusts, which would make a real difference, ensuring a healthier workforce and, ultimately, better patient care. The issue is also costly financially, and an independent review published by Lord Carter in 2016 estimated even then that a mere 1% reduction in staff absences could save ambulance trusts up to �15 million a year. That figure would clearly be even higher now.

I also want to raise the issue of air ambulance services. Air ambulance charities deliver lifesaving treatment every single day and complete more than 25,000 lifesaving missions across the country every year�an average of more than one every 10 minutes. I commend the work of all those involved, and particularly Lincs & Notts Air Ambulance, which operates in and around my constituency, the crew who airlifted my husband from Silverstone to Coventry last year and looked after him so well.

In the last Parliament, the previous Government gave significant support to air ambulances. The Department of Health and Social Care�s three-year capital grant programme in 2019 allocated �10 million to nine charities across England. That funding supported air ambulance charities to move towards 24/7 operations and improved seven airbase facilities across England. However, services are now under threat from the Chancellor�s rise in national insurance and taxes. Lincs & Notts Air Ambulance will need to find another �70,000 just to pay the national insurance rise�this is an entirely charitably funded organisation. Can the Minister justify that policy, given the vital work that air ambulance charities do across the country?

On 19 November, my right hon. Friends the Members for Newark (Robert Jenrick), for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) and for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins), my hon. Friends the Members for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns) and for Grantham and Bourne (Gareth Davies), the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice) and I wrote to the Chancellor to ask about exemptions from the national insurance hike for air ambulances. Despite raising the issue at Treasury questions and in a point of order, and despite repeated chasing from my office, we have not had the courtesy of a proper response to our letter from the Government, although they have suggested that they are now asking the Department of Health and Social Care to respond to the letter. That is a huge discourtesy to the House, and I would be grateful for the Minister�s assurance, because the letter is apparently with the Department of Health, that we will receive a response by the end of the week. That is quite a reasonable request.

Finally, it is fair to say that ambulance crews are doing a sterling job, but that response times are not where we need them to be. I look forward to hearing the Minister tell us how she will improve those services for our constituents.

15:58

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Ashley Dalton)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing the debate. I thank all the hon. Members who have taken part, including my hon. Friends the Members for Redditch (Chris Bloore), for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) and for Wolverhampton West (Warinder Juss), and the hon. Members for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy) and for South Devon (Caroline Voaden), as well as the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan), and the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Dr Johnson). I will endeavour to deal with as many issues and questions as I can. If I do miss any, will hon. Members please get in touch with me afterwards, and I will make sure they are picked up?

The hon. Member for West Suffolk mentioned the commitment made by the Secretary of State to meet him and visit his constituency, and I will ensure that that issue is raised. The parliamentary private secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Southall (Deirdre Costigan), is here, and I am sure she will be happy to pursue a response. We will also do what we can to get a response from the Treasury for the shadow Minister.

The hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton and other hon. Members rightly raised constituents� experiences of long waits for an ambulance response. I put on record my deepest sympathies for the hon. Lady�s constituent Jim on the loss of his wife. As the Secretary of State has made clear, this is not the level of care that staff want for their patients, and it is not the level of care that this Government will ever accept for patients.

Lord Darzi investigated the issues facing the NHS, and his report was honest about the challenges facing the health service. Urgent and emergency care performance remains a long way from a resilient position and there is continued high demand for A&E and ambulance services, with ongoing seasonal winter pressures. For example, in December the London Ambulance Service recorded more than 121,000 incidents, the highest on record for the service. Improvement needs to happen across the urgent and emergency care pathway and through the expansion of neighbourhood health services.

Nationally, congested emergency departments reduce the productivity of ambulance services, a matter that I think almost all hon. Members raised. A huge amount of time is lost to ambulance handover delays because there is no space for patients. Having crews tied up waiting outside hospitals exacerbates poor ambulance response times. We have also seen the continued normalisation of corridor care. We will never accept patients being treated in corridors; it is unsafe and undignified. We are investing an extra �26 billion to begin turning around the NHS, and we will do all we can, as fast as we can, to consign corridor care to the history books.

Lord Darzi�s investigation into NHS performance highlighted wide variation across different parts of the country. The situation is unfair to patients and goes against the principle of a universal service. I acknowledge that there can be challenges in rural areas, where longer distances often mean that patients wait much longer for ambulances than in urban areas. I often find myself in this place with the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton, and we both talk about the experience in our rural constituencies. I assure her that that is on my agenda. As she says, ambulance response times for the south-west and some other areas highlight the rurality differential.

In January, the South Western Ambulance Service�s average response for category 2 emergency incidents, which include strokes and heart attacks, was 51 minutes and 45 seconds, which is 26 minutes longer than the best-performing ambulance trust in England. The NHS constitutional standard for category 2 average response times is 18 minutes, and no ambulance trust in England has met that target since the pandemic. This cannot go on. Prioritising patient safety will always be the Government�s and the NHS�s main focus. We are committed to getting A&E waiting times and ambulance response times back to NHS constitutional standards.

The independent review of ambulance trust culture was published in February 2024. Its recommendations included addressing workforce pressures. NHS England is working closely with ambulance trusts to implement those recommendations. We have made some significant investments in the ambulance workforce, and the number of NHS ambulance staff has grown by 9% compared with last year, but we recognise that there is much more to do on retention and wellbeing for ambulance staff. That is something that we will continue to work on.

We cannot keep plugging the gaps. There is a need for more fundamental reform. We have been clear that there are no quick fixes and that to turn things around will take investment and reform. We have provided the highest real-terms capital budget for the NHS since before 2010. We announced an extra �22.6 billion in day-to-day health spending and an additional �3.1 billion further capital investment over two years. That extra investment will be accompanied by fundamental reform, of which ambulance services.

In January, the Government published �Road to recovery: the government�s 2025 mandate to NHS England�, which clearly sets out delivery instructions for the NHS through the prioritisation of the five key objectives aimed at driving reform in the NHS. Improving A&E and ambulance service performance was also one of a small number of prioritised objectives in the Government�s mandate to NHS England to specifically start to address the current challenges facing urgent and emergency care.

In turn, NHS England�s planning guidance for this year includes the target to improve average category 2 ambulance response times to no more than 30 minutes across 2025-26. The guidance also sets out a range of key actions for the NHS to deliver in the same timeframe, focused on reducing avoidable ambulance dispatches and conveyances and reducing hospital handover delays.

[Helen Morgan]

Will the Minister pick up on the point about social care? Inability to admit to hospital is a key point in the handover delay problem, and the social care talks are a key measure in solving it.

[Ashley Dalton]

The hon. Member will be delighted to know that I am coming to that point next.

We are working on reducing delays and getting hospital handovers back to within 15 minutes, ensuring that no handover between hospital and ambulance services takes longer than 45 minutes. We want to improve the range and co-ordination of services to avoid unnecessary ambulance conveyances, including through improving access to urgent community response and hospital at home services, and continuing to build on ambulance services and the great work that they do to increase the hear and treat rates so that people can be advised on what they can do and what services they can access that might mean they do not need that ambulance. We will also be driving consistency and commissioning practices across England for ambulance services. I will say a little more about the rurality element in a moment.

We are taking the first steps in the reform and improvements that we want to see in services, and we will shortly set out further plans in the urgent and emergency care services plan. We know that there is no solution for ambulances that does not include tackling the challenges facing adult social care. Health and care services need to be more joined up.

Today, there are approximately 12,000 patients in hospital beds who have no criteria to reside. They do not need to be there but cannot be discharged for reasons of capacity. Over the last month, on average, 276 of the patients with no criteria to reside were in the Somerset integrated board area. That is why the Government are making available up to �3.7 billion of additional funding for local authorities that provide social care. We are funding more home adaptations through the disabled facilities grant this year and next, so that people�s homes can be safer, reducing the risk of their needing an ambulance. We are reforming the better care fund to ensure that the pooled NHS and local authority funding spent on social care contributes to wider efforts to reduce emergency admissions and delayed discharges.

[Dr Caroline Johnson]

Social care is clearly very important, but what assessment has the Department made of the effect of national insurance contributions on social care provision as a whole?

[Ashley Dalton]

The hon. Member will be aware, because we have discussed the matter many times in Westminster Hall and the main Chamber, that the funding has been made available to the statutory sector bodies for employer national insurance contributions for public sector pay, and the negotiations for the delivery of commissioned services locally and within the NHS will take place locally. I am sure that we will be able to point her to some more detail on that issue, which has been discussed at length by colleagues.

We have announced the largest ever increase in the carer�s allowance earnings limit since the benefit was introduced in 1976. It is worth approximately �2,000 a year for unpaid carers. We are also introducing fair pay agreements to empower worker representatives, employers and others to negotiate pay and terms and conditions in a responsible manner. That will help to address the recruitment and retention crisis in the sector. It is not all about ENICs; it is about making sure that our social care service is resourced in order to make sure that social carers are recognised for the powerful and important work that they do. We have appointed Louise Casey to help to build a national consensus on the long-term solution for social care.

The social care cross-party talks, to which the Liberal Democrat spokesperson referred, have not been called off; they have been merely delayed. As I told her in the Chamber just yesterday, it is very much about making sure that we have the right people in the room and that they can attend. It is our intention for the talks to go ahead very soon. They have not been called off; they have been merely postponed.

Of course, we need further reform. We are bringing it forward through the 10-year plan this spring to accompany the additional investment in the NHS. The Government will publish that plan for radical reform in the NHS, with those three big reform shifts: from hospital to community, from analogue to digital and from sickness to prevention. The reforms will support putting the NHS on a sustainable footing so that it can tackle the problems of today and of the future.

The shadow Minister asked about the configuration of ambulance services. As I am sure she is aware, decisions on service configuration must be made by those who are experts in delivering it.

We have also talked about the key issues of rurality. A range of adjustments are made in the core ICB allocations formula to account for the fact that the costs of providing healthcare may vary between rural and urban areas. Some of the differences, such as the tendency for rural populations to be older, are naturally captured within the formula. We continue to review the formula for the impact of the characteristics of local areas, such as rural, urban and coastal, in the development programme.

I encourage all hon. Members to raise these matters with their local ICBs, which are responsible for commissioning the right configuration of local services. The NHS has increased the availability of local data on ambulance response times performance, with category 2 ambulance performance now published at ICB level, which has increased the transparency of the important data. I encourage hon. Members to use that data to direct conversations with their ICBs.

We have also talked about air ambulances. I am sure that all hon. Members recognise the contribution that they make, as the Government do. The Government support the long-standing independent air ambulance charities model for the successful operation of helicopter emergency medical services in England, which gives the sector the independence to raise funds through commercial activity and sponsorship from corporate partners. The NHS continues to support air ambulance services, including through thorough training and the provision of NHS clinicians.

Communities right across the country, including the constituents of the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton, are struggling with poor services and crumbling NHS estates. We are putting record capital into the NHS. We will bring down ambulance response times. We will get waiting lists back down to what they were in 2010. It will take time, but we will deliver an NHS and a national care service that provide people with the care they need, when and where they need it.

16:14

[Sarah Dyke]

I thank all hon. Members for their contributions to this important debate. The examples that they raised highlight the urgent need to improve ambulance response times. It is just unacceptable that people cannot trust that when they need an ambulance, one will arrive. That is not fair on patients or on the incredible ambulance staff who dedicate themselves to saving lives.

I urge the Government to listen to the Liberal Democrats� calls to publish localised ambulance data, reduce hospital bed occupancy rates to 85% by increasing the number of staffed beds, and introduce a new winter taskforce that would manage a ringfenced fund of �1.5 billion to build resilience in the system. Those changes would lead to improvements that cannot come soon enough.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered ambulance service response times.

16:16

Sitting adjourned.