House of Commons
Oral Answers to Questions
(1 day, 12 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Darren Jones)
Good morning, Mr Speaker. It is nice to be back in the Chamber. [Laughter.]
Since coming into office, the Prime Minister has published a new and strengthened ministerial code that places emphasis on the importance of public service and new principles on gifts and hospitality, and includes strengthened powers for the independent adviser on ministerial standards. The Prime Minister has also introduced new rules on severance. Ministers who leave office after having been found to have seriously breached the code are expected to forgo their severance pay, and former Ministers who are found to have seriously breached the business appointment rules are expected to repay any severance too. Colleagues across the House will remember the spectacle of former Tory Minister after former Tory Minister receiving it during the last Parliament, but that has now ended under this Labour Government.
Olly Glover
I was reading the ministerial code just yesterday evening. Paragraph 2.1 states:
“The Prime Minister is the ultimate judge of the standards of behaviour expected of a minister and the appropriate consequences of a breach of those standards.”
That provides clarity on how Ministers can be held to account by the Prime Minister. However, as the old saying goes, “Who watches the watchmen?” When there is a concern about whether the Prime Minister’s conduct goes against the ministerial code, does the Minister agree that the code itself needs strengthening so that the PM can be held to its standards?
Darren Jones
I reassure the hon. Member and the House that the ultimate accountability for the Prime Minister is both to this House and to the public at a general election.
Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)
It is really great that Ministers have rapidly set about reforming the ministerial code so that never again will the public purse be forced to pay out £253,720 for ex-Ministers who were in post for less than six months, as happened in 2022 under the Tories. Now that we hear about Peter Mandelson, the payoff he wanted and the payoff he got, are the Government open to the logic of applying the same principles of the ministerial code to disgraced ex-political appointee ambassadors, perchance? That way, we can restore consistency.
Darren Jones
My hon. Friend will recognise that appointments to the civil service are made on the basis of employment law, which is different from the situation for Ministers and Members of this House, but it is right that the Government have changed the rules to ensure that disgraced politicians do not receive payouts for wrongdoing, which is what happened under the last Conservative Administration.
Alex Burghart (Brentwood and Ongar) (Con)
Paragraph 1.6.c of the ministerial code states:
“It is of paramount importance that ministers give accurate and truthful information to Parliament, correcting any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity.”
Yesterday, the Prime Minister said to the House that Sir Olly Robbins
“went on to say: ‘I…have complete confidence that… recommendations to me and the discussion we had and the decision we made were rigorously independent of’ any ‘pressure.’”—[Official Report, 22 April 2026; Vol. 784, c. 316.]
What Sir Olly actually said to the Foreign Affairs Committee was:
“I also have complete confidence that their recommendations to me and the discussion we had and the decision we made were rigorously independent of that pressure.”
Sir Olly said “that” pressure, not “any” pressure. The Prime Minister materially changed Sir Olly’s meaning. Robbins was clear that he had been put under pressure. Does the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister know whether the Prime Minister intends to correct the record?
Darren Jones
I think the difference between the words “that” and “any” is not of material relevance to the question that the shadow Minister is putting to the House. The Prime Minister has not misled the House. The testimony of the Prime Minister and of Sir Olly Robbins is very clearly on the record, and that makes the case.
Alex Burghart
The Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister is perfectly intelligent enough to know that there is an enormous difference between those two words. I will remind him that the Prime Minister is bound by the ministerial code.
Yesterday, the Prime Minister also told the House:
“Sir Olly was absolutely clear that nobody put pressure on him to make this appointment”—[Official Report, 22 April 2026; Vol. 784, c. 316.]
but that is not what Sir Olly said to the Foreign Affairs Committee. He actually said:
“Throughout January, honestly, my office and the Foreign Secretary’s office were under constant pressure.”
Again, he said that
“while I think the Department felt under pressure, we were proud of the fact that we had not bowed to that pressure.”
Again, he said that Philip Barton’s handover to him
“contributed to my strong sense that there was an atmosphere of pressure”.
To avoid being in breach of the ministerial code, Ministers must correct the record at the earliest available opportunity. At the very latest, the earliest opportunity is now. Will the Prime Minister correct the record?
Darren Jones
It is not the view of the Prime Minister or the Government that the Prime Minister needs to do so.
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)
At Prime Minister’s questions yesterday, when asked by my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), the Prime Minister failed to deny that he knew that his team were lobbying for a head of mission role for Matthew Doyle, and that they were doing so with his authority. Under the ministerial code, he has clear duties of transparency to this House. For No. 10 to ask the Foreign Office to find a plum diplomatic job for another Labour mate who was friends with a convicted sex offender, let alone to then keep it secret from the Foreign Secretary, is completely shocking. The Prime Minister has shown another catastrophic lack of judgment. Will the Minister ensure that an inquiry is launched by the Cabinet Secretary to determine who did the lobbying and why, and what the Prime Minister knew and when?
Darren Jones
The Prime Minister has spent very many hours at the Dispatch Box this week being held to account and answering questions on a whole range of issues. In respect of the particulars of the hon. Lady’s question, I refer her to the Prime Minister’s words of only yesterday.
Neil Duncan-Jordan (Poole) (Lab)
Linsey Farnsworth (Amber Valley) (Lab)
Justin Madders (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough) (Lab)
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Chris Ward)
As I informed the House yesterday, I am bringing forward a major package of reforms to procurement policy. This includes steps to direct Government procurement in the national interest to support British businesses, to end the era of outsourcing across Departments, and to streamline and simplify the entire process. I will bring forward further details to the House as soon as possible, including when we publish new guidance.
Neil Duncan-Jordan
Since 2015, companies that donated to political parties have secured £60 billion-worth of Government contracts. This highlights everything that the public dislike about politics. Does the Minister therefore agree that for the sake of transparency and accountability, it is time to break the link between big-money donors and the Governments they pay to elect?
Chris Ward
The Government are, of course, concerned about the risks that my hon. Friend has mentioned. There are strong safeguards in the Procurement Act 2023 to preserve the integrity of the procurement process, but the elections Bill that this Government are introducing will tighten up the regulation of donations, including through a ban on crypto donations.
Linsey Farnsworth
Yesterday in this House, when I asked the Minister to include ceramics in the “back British business” procurement strategy, he said that the strategy only covers four sectors that are deemed vital to national security, while acknowledging that he would like to go further. Since then, a further 49 workers have been made redundant at Denby Pottery in my constituency. Ministers across Departments repeat the same message, but the sector cannot wait. More than 50,000 people are backing the #SaveDenby campaign by buying Denby pottery and signing a petition calling for the ceramics industry to be in the British industry supercharger scheme. Will the Minister commit today to matching that public support by including ceramics within the scope of the new public procurement changes before more jobs are lost?
Chris Ward
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this issue again. As I said in the House yesterday, Denby is an iconic British manufacturer, and I know the anxiety that the workforce will feel at the moment. Ceramics is not part of the original four sectors, but I do not want to stop with those four; we want to go further, and I am happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss this issue and work with her on it. I should add that we have announced wider measures that will benefit the ceramics sector, including changes to how we calculate social value and the impact on local communities and jobs. However, I get her point, and I will happily meet her to discuss it.
Justin Madders
Last week, I had the pleasure of visiting the Royal Mail depot in Ellesmere Port, where I went in one of its newly purchased vans from the Stellantis factory just down the road—a perfect example of how we should be supporting British industry. I urge the Minister to look further at this issue, because what he has announced is a start, but it does not go far enough. We need to make sure that every school, hospital, council, utility and big provider of services in this country is looking at how it can buy British and support our great manufacturing sector.
Chris Ward
I thank my hon. Friend for his question. I also met Royal Mail in my constituency recently and had a similar conversation, and I understand his point. As I say, I am not pretending that we have gone the full journey with procurement reform. We are taking big steps, but we need to go further, and I am very happy to work with my hon. Friend and others to do so.
Chris Vince
Happy St George’s day, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his earlier remarks on procurement, and I agree that £400 billion of public spending is a significant lever that this Labour Government have to better support businesses across our country. How will the Minister and his colleagues across Government work with me to ensure that our public money will be spent well and deliver for well-skilled jobs in—drum roll—Harlow?
Chris Ward
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Communities should be benefiting much more from the taxpayers’ money we are spending on procurement. I believe he mentioned two businesses in his constituency yesterday—Wright’s Flour mill and Lea Valley growers. To be clear, those are exactly the type of businesses we have in mind when we say we are trying to support local businesses to make a big impact in the community with lots of local jobs and so on. That is the kind of group I want to help going forward.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his answers and for his endeavours to try to do better. The Minister and this House must recognise that public confidence is incredibly low due to repeated failures by the Government, I say respectfully, to do the right thing. How can the Government and the Minister ensure that changes take effect that restore confidence and remove any shade from areas of government? We have an obligation as elected representatives to openness and transparency.
Chris Ward
The hon. Gentleman is right to flag that concern, and it is something that the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister is working hard on with a package of reforms around transparency. On procurement changes, I emphasise that I am trying to work with businesses, unions, charities, the voluntary sector and as many people as I can to bring them in. The more we listen to them, the more we will get this right, but he makes a broader point that I know my colleagues are working hard on, too.
Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)
Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Satvir Kaur)
The issues and delays that a number of civil servants and pension scheme members have encountered when accessing their pensions after a lifetime of service are completely unacceptable. Members of the House will have heard my right hon. Friend the Paymaster General’s statement to the House yesterday on the Government’s robust recovery plan to stabilise the service, while ensuring that support is in place for those impacted. We will continue to use every commercial lever possible to hold Capita to account so that public servants get the quality service they deserve as soon as possible.
Rachel Taylor
Happy Warwickshire day, Mr Speaker, and happy St George’s day.
My constituent Jillian dedicated her life to public service for 34 years before retiring. She is owed more than £2,000 in a lump sum from her civil service pension. She has constantly tried to get in touch with Capita over the past six months. She has submitted online forms, rung multiple times and has been told that Capita is not hitting its complaints target. After being on hold for several hours, a call operator told her that they could not tell her when she would receive an answer. This is unacceptable. Can the Government tell me what they are doing to support retired civil servants who have been left in limbo by Capita?
Satvir Kaur
I also wish my hon. Friend a happy Warwickshire day and a happy St George’s day. I thank her constituent Jillian for her public service of 34 years. I agree with my hon. Friend that the service that Jillian has experienced is completely unacceptable. My hon. Friend will know that we have taken a number of measures, including deploying a surge team to help stabilise the service, and we continue to hold Capita to account for poor service. I encourage her and other Members to direct affected constituents to the hardship loans we have made available to support those impacted. If she sends me the details of Jillian’s case, I will make sure to look out for them.
Christine Jardine
Happy St George’s day. Yesterday, in the statement, the Paymaster General was kind enough to say that he would look into the case of one of my constituents who is afraid that she will lose her house because she has no income and cannot get access to her civil service pension. However, I have several other affected constituents, one who is still working full time and is a full-time carer. They were supposed to retire in January but cannot, because they cannot get access to their pension. Can I meet the Minister to discuss what is happening and how we can get Capita to pay attention to this issue and to look for a way forward?
Satvir Kaur
I thank the hon. Member for raising both of those distressing cases, and I would of course be happy to meet her to discuss them.
Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Chris Ward)
As I set out to the House yesterday, this Labour Government are ending the age of outsourcing. We will introduce a public interest test to require all Departments to assess whether a service can be better delivered in-house. We will also require all Departments to publish insourcing strategies setting out how they will make greater insourcing a reality over the medium term. Taken together, that is a step change in how we approach this, and I am proud that a Labour Government are delivering it.
Jodie Gosling
Mr Speaker, I wish you a happy Warwickshire day and a happy St George’s day.
Nuneaton residents are concerned about the performance of Capita since it took over the civil service pensions. I know these concerns are shared across the House, as we have just heard some of the horror stories coming into many inboxes. Those residents will therefore be surprised to see that the Government have recently agreed a £900 million, 10-year deal for the same company to take over the civil service payroll contract under the Synergy programme. Does my hon. Friend agree with me that maintaining current insourcing is the only way to ensure value for taxpayers’ money and a decent level of service for residents?
Chris Ward
The Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office updated the House on this yesterday, and he has answered a number of questions on that issue. I do agree that insourcing can play a key role in delivering better value for money and higher-quality public services, which is one reason why we are introducing the public interest test and ending the age of outsourcing.
David Davis (Goole and Pocklington) (Con)
Damian Hinds (East Hampshire) (Con)
The Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Nick Thomas-Symonds)
I wish a happy Warwickshire day to my Warwickshire friends and a happy St George’s day to all my English friends. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]
We are prioritising paying compensation to those impacted, and the Infected Blood Compensation Authority has reached the significant milestone of paying out over £2 billion, including the first payment to all eligible groups. I am sure that the right hon. Gentlemen will be aware that I recently announced substantive changes in all seven areas on which we have recently consulted.
David Davis
I thank the Minister and I welcome what he has just said, but the infected blood scandal left thousands of people with severe lifelong injuries. Many of them have waited decades—some nearly half a century—for justice, and with every week that passes the likelihood that any of them will die goes up. As I am sure he is aware, IBCA announced last week that it will contact 100 people a week to begin claims, but that is not quick enough for the 18,000 people involved. It has dealt with roughly 3,000, who have been paid already, but 15,000 of the 18,000 are still waiting. Victims and families deserve compensation, and quickly, so what can he do to speed up that process?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
The right hon. Gentleman quite correctly raises not only the fact that people have waited decades for compensation, but the urgency with which we want to drive this forward. To be precise, 3,304 infected people had received an offer by 23 April, totalling over £2.6 billion. We have started paying the affected cohort, and the milestone of paying out in the first case by the end of last year was met. It is quite right that IBCA is operationally independent, but I nevertheless stand ready to do all I can to support it to speed up payments.
Damian Hinds
I thank the Paymaster General for his personal work in this area. The increase in the unethical research award is a material improvement, and I am particularly thinking of the former pupils at Treloar’s. However, there is still some uncertainty in the community about the evidence that will be required to qualify for the severe psychological harm element under the special category mechanism. Could he confirm how that will work, and will IBCA have discretion and flexibility about what evidence will be required?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
I pay tribute to the right hon. Gentleman’s work in providing a voice for the pupils who suffered such heinous medical experimentation at Treloar’s. On the issue of the evidence, generally speaking I have always said to IBCA that there needs to be a very sympathetic approach, because we are talking about not only events of a long time ago, but deliberate document destruction. On the specific issue of severe psychological harm under the special category mechanism, I will write to him very precisely about the position.
Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)
First, I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend for the way he has handled this issue and for the way he has moved it on in the short time he has been in office. Everyone is very grateful for that. None the less, he knows that there are still widespread concerns among the community about the compensation process. Will he guarantee that those people will continue to be listened to and that their voices will not be dismissed, so we can adapt the process as it goes forward to address some of their concerns? I am grateful to him for coming to the all-party parliamentary group on haemophilia and contaminated blood to discuss this directly with the community. I would be grateful if he would do so again before the summer recess, so that people can talk to him directly about their concerns.
Nick Thomas-Symonds
I look forward to an invitation from my hon. Friend and I pay tribute to his work as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group. What he says about the voice of the community going forward is absolutely right. That is why I have created, and announced to the House, a mechanism by which concerns that are expressed are appropriately elevated to where decisions need to be made. I was determined not to have some sort of glorified post box that people sent correspondence into. If concerns are raised, they must be dealt with at the appropriate level, whether that is the Infected Blood Compensation Authority board, or escalated to the Cabinet Office.
Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)
I thank my right hon. Friend for the sterling work he has done on this scandal. As mentioned by those on the Opposition Benches, there are still real issues that need to be worked on. The infected blood community have huge concerns about the stringent evidence required for severe psychological harm compensation. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that IBCA is permissive, flexible and compassionate when setting the special category mechanism criteria for psychological harm and, at the same time, when assessing the claims?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
I thank my hon. Friend and pay tribute to him for the work he has done campaigning for victims. On IBCA and the culture, and on how it treats evidence, as I said, there needs to be a sympathetic and compassionate approach to evidence. In that regard, when I have visited IBCA I have been very impressed with the general ethos that people have been trained in. Specifically on severe psychological harm, I have made very significant changes to the special category mechanism. On the precise issue of the evidence, I will write to my hon. Friend, as I promised to do to the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds).
Yuan Yang (Earley and Woodley) (Lab)
Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
The Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Nick Thomas-Symonds)
Just this week and last, I have been across the channel to speak to EU counterparts and counterparts in member states. We are making good progress with the EU in our strategic partnership in a changing world. It is a strategic partnership that is good for bills, good for borders and good for jobs.
Yuan Yang
Mr Speaker, I wish you and the Minister a happy St George’s day. I congratulate my right hon. Friend on rejoining the EU Erasmus+ scheme. It is very exciting for students across the UK, including at the University of Reading.
On energy prices, we are all paying the price of Trump’s war in Iran. It is vital for us to work with our European allies to lower energy prices, including reducing the trade costs brought up by the Tories’ bad Brexit deal. Will the Minister give us an update on his negotiations for the UK to participate in EU internal electricity markets?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
Erasmus+ will indeed provide tens of thousands of opportunities, particularly for young people. On energy, we are committed to strengthening our energy partnership with the EU to lower bills for households and businesses. On the negotiations my hon. Friend is talking about, I think everybody would see that strengthening this international co-operation is vital to bolster energy resilience against the kind of global shocks we have seen in recent weeks.
Steve Race
Mr Speaker, Happy St George’s day to you and to the House.
From pandemics and health emergencies to the impact of climate change and Russian aggression on our border, residents in Exeter know that the EU and the UK have shared challenges and opportunities. What discussions has the Minister had on forming a UK-EU resilience partnership, as suggested by UK in a Changing Europe, so we can effectively manage those shared challenges together?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the UK and EU share many challenges. That is why the Government have agreed a new strategic partnership with the EU to bolster our shared resilience through deeper co-operation between the UK and the EU across defence, industry, politics and the wider economy—the foundations upon which our collective European security and prosperity will rest.
Bradley Thomas
The European Union currently allows for food production methods that are either banned or being phased out in the UK, which is undercutting British farmers. Will the Minister outline what discussions have taken place with the European Union to ensure parity of welfare standards so that British farmers are not priced out of the market?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
The common understanding that we agreed with the EU last year allowed for particular carve-outs, which the Government are negotiating. I will say to the hon. Gentleman, though, that the sanitary and phytosanitary agreement—the food and drink agreement—will mean that we will be able to export to the EU products that we are currently unable to export, and will take away costs and fees that businesses have to pay. I used to think that the Conservatives were the pro-business party—they might want to actually approve of that.
Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)
Is the House right to understand that the Government believe that the economy has grown significantly less—measurably less—as a result of leaving the EU, and that this is one of the purposes behind the reset? [Hon. Members: “Yes!”] I hear Government Members saying yes. Could the Government then set that out, with all the evidence and arguments proving the case? Looking at the evidence, the British economy grew at about the same rate as France and Germany when we were in the EU and, since we left, we have been growing at about the same rate as France and Germany; in fact, this year, the British economy is growing faster than Germany’s. Where is the evidence that Brexit was economically damaging? Will the Minister publish a proper statement on that?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
The hon. Gentleman and I work very well on other issues; I suspect that over the next 12 months, this is an issue on which we are going to disagree. If he is genuinely asking me at the Dispatch Box to provide evidence to the country about the lamentable performance of the economy in the latter years of the previous Conservative Government, then what a pleasure it will be!
Rosie Wrighting (Kettering) (Lab)
I thank the Government for the grown-up approach they have taken to improving our relations with our friends and neighbours in the EU. In contrast—as we can see today—the Conservative party is still playing politics with our closest allies, and my generation has paid the price. With that in mind, will the Minister set out what steps are being taken to ensure that young people in Kettering and across the country take up the opportunity to study in the EU, now that we have rejoined the Erasmus scheme?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
The new UK-EU strategic partnership will bear down on household bills, provide opportunities for young people and create jobs. The Opposition, for reasons best known to them, have decided to oppose all that.
Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)
I wish the House and you, Mr Speaker, a happy St George’s day. I welcome the fact that the Government are taking steps to improve and deepen our trading relationship with Europe, which is absolutely crucial to businesses right across my constituency, which have told me again and again of the challenges they face as a direct result of this flawed Brexit process. Could the Minister set out what plans he has to ensure that proper parliamentary scrutiny is given to anything relating to improving relations with the EU, given that we no longer have a Select Committee that deals directly with those issues?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
There will be a Bill—a piece of primary legislation—going through Parliament this year, which will of course have appropriate scrutiny, as will our relationship with the EU going forward. I very much look forward to those debates. I will just give one example of how we are helping businesses. Businesses in the UK have had to pay up to £200 for export health certificates—more than 1 million of them—since 2023. I say that they should not have to pay those fees any more; the Conservatives and Reform say that they should.
Mike Wood (Kingswinford and South Staffordshire) (Con)
The UK has become a global leader in agri-tech and particularly selective breeding, largely because of our flexible regulatory framework, including the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act 2023. That would not have happened if we were still members of the European Union. The BioIndustry Association says that dynamic alignment would threaten UK leadership in biotech innovation. Will the Minister commit to securing a carve-out for precision breeding so that our success in this vital sector is not threatened by new or future EU legislation?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
The common understanding agreed between the UK and the EU last May provides for carve-outs, subject to negotiation. But if the hon. Gentleman seriously thinks that all the export costs and fees that businesses are currently paying, which the SPS agreement will take away, should continue, he should say so.
Mike Wood
I think the House and the public outside will have heard that the Minister is refusing to give that commitment to the representatives of this vital sector. However, he will know that the high cost of fertilisers is one of the biggest pressures on British farming and food prices. Raising carbon prices to the level of the EU’s carbon border adjustment mechanism is projected to add around £100 a tonne to that cost. At a time of high food costs and squeezed food security, does he really think that now is a sensible time to hammer British farming yet again?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
That is an absolutely absurd question. The hon. Gentleman is asking that question when his party’s position is to keep in place all the fees that we currently have to pay on exports to the EU. He also talks about the emissions trading system linkage. Without mutual exemptions from the carbon border adjustment mechanism, businesses will have to pay around £700 million in carbon taxes. The consequence of his party’s position is that they would have to pay them.
Mr Peter Bedford (Mid Leicestershire) (Con)
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Satvir Kaur)
Departments are responsible for setting their own performance plans, subject to centrally set performance management frameworks. This Government are focused on a high-performing civil service, which is why we have recently announced changes to the senior civil service performance system that will see the performance of top civil servants linked to key performance indicators set by their Ministers, and underperformers held to tougher standards.
Mr Bedford
Our constituents must interact with many Government agencies each week to renew their passport or driving licence or to submit their tax returns. Despite record numbers of bureaucrats, productivity remains low, which results in many errors and vast delays for our constituents. The answers to my written parliamentary questions confirm that there is no proper performance management of our civil servants, corrective action or even dismissals for continued poor performance. Without the usual platitudes about how hard civil servants work, I want to know what the Government are doing about the thousands of poorly performing civil servants who are costing our constituents millions of pounds each year.
Satvir Kaur
I think it is ironic that Opposition Members complain about civil servants but did nothing when they were in power. Instead, this Government are updating the performance management framework, incentivising those who deliver and tackling underperformance as soon as it arises. To do this, we are changing the rules to ensure a closer, more effective link between pay and performance, with larger awards for the highest performers, and strengthening the minimum standards so that those who fail to manage the performance of their teams are quickly identified.
Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)
The Minister of State, Cabinet Office (Dan Jarvis)
The Government are taking decisive steps to strengthen our national resilience, as set out in the resilience action plan. Building on the findings of Exercise Pegasus, the Government published a new pandemic preparedness strategy just last month. It sets out how the UK intends to rebuild readiness and strengthen underlying capabilities for future pandemics through a whole-of-Government approach.
Rachel Gilmour
Not long ago, a Russian-flagged ship anchored just two miles off the Minehead coast in my constituency, directly above critical transatlantic cables. Our adversaries are becoming emboldened and operating even closer to home.
As the proud sister of a serving brigadier and a retired lieutenant colonel, who between them have served for over half a century in our armed forces, I know the calibre of those who serve. However, reports that the Ministry of Defence has lost track of some 95,000 veterans on the recall list are alarming. How can the Government credibly claim to be strengthening national resilience when they lack the basic data required to mobilise those capable of serving in a national emergency?
Dan Jarvis
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for the point she raised and the way she raised it, and I pay tribute to the service of her family members, as I am sure all hon. Members will do. This matter is one that we take incredibly seriously. I can tell her and the House that, following sanctions already imposed on 544 vessels, the Prime Minister has now agreed that the British military will be able to board shadow fleet vessels passing through UK waters, but I will look carefully at the hon. Lady’s points and discuss them with colleagues in the Ministry of Defence.
Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)
Happy Warwickshire day and St George’s day, Mr Speaker. Clearly resilience is multifaceted and goes beyond subsea cables, which the hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) referred to. We are the third most attacked nation globally when it comes to cyber-attacks, as the Minister will know. What steps is the Department taking to raise public awareness generally?
Dan Jarvis
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the work that he and the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy do in this area. I was at CYBERUK yesterday, in the great city of Glasgow, and I can give him an assurance that we take these threats very seriously. The National Cyber Security Centre and our intelligence agencies continually monitor such risks and work closely with industry and with our international partners to protect our networks. As I set out yesterday, we will continue to strengthen our defences and ensure that we remain resilient.
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)
Earlier this year, the NATO Secretary-General said:
“We are not at war, but we are not at peace either.”
Trump’s reckless war in Iran has shown how vulnerable our country is to external shocks, while Putin’s imperial ambitions pose a once-in-a-generation threat to our security and our way of life. The UK is not resilient or prepared enough for future shocks and threats. We have seen press reports this week describing the risk of shortages of certain foods and medicines, brought about by Trump’s idiotic actions in Iran. What specific steps are the Government taking to address those potential shortages, and how does the Minister plan to communicate with the public to ensure that our constituents are not left without information or support, should the availability of the medicine they need fall victim to Trump’s foolishness?
Dan Jarvis
I agree with the comments from the Secretary-General of NATO that the hon. Lady cited. From previous conversations that we have had, I think she understands the seriousness we attach to those issues. The Cabinet Office co-ordinates a whole-of-Government response and we work closely on those issues with partners, including in the Ministry of Defence. She is right about the need to communicate those issues to the public, and we are looking at how we can do that most effectively.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Chris Ward)
As I have said, this Government do not believe that our procurement rules do enough to back British businesses. That is why I have announced steps to address that, and to simplify and open up the system to small and medium-sized enterprises, start-ups and charities. We will issue new guidance shortly to ensure that the procurement regime always serves the national interest.
Leigh Ingham
Happy St George’s day, Mr Speaker. GE Vernova, in my constituency of Stafford, Eccleshall and the villages, is creating 400 new jobs to add to the 1,400 people it already employs. I believe that companies like this, which are already backing Britain by investing here, should be given more consideration when they are competing for Government contracts. Can the Minister assure me that when UK Government money is being spent, particularly in industries that are key to our national security such as energy, we will prioritise those companies already investing in British manufacturing, British skills and British jobs?
Chris Ward
My hon. Friend is spot on, and I thank her for championing her local business while making a bigger point about how we need to support British jobs more widely. We have set out what we are going to do in four sectors, including energy infrastructure, but I agree that we need to go further and look at what more we can do in particular to support our manufacturing industry, and hopefully we will keep working to do that.
Lorraine Beavers (Blackpool North and Fleetwood) (Lab)
The Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Nick Thomas-Symonds)
My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, is doing great work to ensure that public procurement is on the side of working people. Outsourcing by default has not delivered, so a new public interest test would ensure that outsourcing decisions are based on value for money, social value, market and economic impact, and capability and capacity.
Lorraine Beavers
Despite Capita’s horrendous administration of the civil service pension scheme, it was still awarded the Synergy shared services contract. We still do not have a reason why—and I am not the first person in this House to ask. Will the Minister finally confirm who was responsible for the decision and whether the Cabinet Office signed it off?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
I entirely agree with my hon. Friend’s assessment of Capita’s lamentable performance on the civil service pension scheme. We have to take individual decisions on contracts. For example, yesterday I cancelled Capita’s contract for the Royal Mail statutory pension scheme. I am robustly holding Capita to account, including by withholding milestone payments on the civil service pension scheme. With regard to the Synergy contract, that was led by the Department for Work and Pensions through the normal process, and it too will be managed robustly.
Rachel Blake (Cities of London and Westminster) (Lab/Co-op)
The Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Nick Thomas-Symonds)
We are taking forward negotiations with the EU to drive investment, jobs and growth for the UK pragmatically. On ideological grounds, the Conservatives and Reform would undo it all, and Green party foreign policy—let us be frank—is a dangerous fantasy.
Rachel Blake
I wish you a very happy St George’s day, Mr Speaker. The Cities of London and Westminster hold many celebrations for St George’s day.
We heard significant movement earlier today regarding energy. What economic assessment has been made beyond food and drink, the youth experience scheme, Erasmus and the emissions trading system to make sure that, at the forthcoming summit, we deliver on our commitments?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
My hon. Friend can be assured that we will continue to drive forward to deliver on our commitment. The electricity trading negotiations are absolutely vital, not only for energy security but to bear down on household bills.
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Darren Jones)
On 11 March the Government responded to the Humble Address by releasing a first tranche of documents in respect of Peter Mandelson’s appointment and subsequent dismissal as ambassador to the United States. I would like to reassure Members across the House that we are proceeding at pace to publish a second tranche of documents to comply with the Humble Address, and we will provide a further update to the House as soon as possible.
Mr Mohindra
Will the Minister reassure me that the Intelligence and Security Committee will be prioritised when new information comes to light, as per the terms of the Humble Address, as opposed to information first being given to Downing Street or to journalists to then publish at their own convenience, as was the case when it was discovered that Peter Mandelson had failed security vetting?
Darren Jones
I can confirm that the Government are working closely with the Intelligence and Security Committee on processing documents relating to the Humble Address, and we thank the Committee for its work.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
Happy St George’s day, Mr Speaker. The Minister is working diligently to produce all those documents. Will he ensure that they are provided before Parliament is prorogued at the end of the Session?
Darren Jones
A number of documents are still being worked through by the Intelligence and Security Committee. In line with the process that I have set out, we want that to conclude before the documents are published to the House.
Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)
The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Darren Jones)
In January I announced that I was giving Government Departments more freedom, hand in hand with greater accountability, to take the initiative to move fast and fix things. Project Reset went live this month, slashing the number of central approval processes to streamline decision making across Government. We will also shortly announce the first delivery taskforces to break down departmental silos and accelerate delivery of the Prime Minister’s priorities.
Richard Quigley
Happy St George’s day, Mr Speaker. My right hon. Friend may have heard me say what a fantastic place the Isle of Wight is to live, work and learn. Does he agree that our island is uniquely well placed to test exciting new policies and initiatives across all Departments to speed up national roll-out, as evidenced in an article this week in Computer Weekly by James Findlay, and that rather than being left behind, as we were under the previous Conservative Government, it is now time for the Isle of Wight to be a leader in building the better country that this Government want and that we all deserve?
Darren Jones
I congratulate my hon. Friend on being such a champion for his constituency. I am sure that he will agree with me, and certainly with those of us on the Government Benches, that the previous Conservative Government failed the Isle of Wight, as well as the whole country, during their 14 years in office. This Administration have launched a “test, learn and grow” programme so that the Government can work more closely with local partners to test and innovate on the design of public services more locally in the places where people need them. Given my hon. Friend’s keen interest in those approaches, I will arrange for him to engage with the TLG network within my Department and will be in touch in due course.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
The Minister of State, Cabinet Office (Dan Jarvis)
The Cabinet Office is driving implementation of the national security strategy. At CyberUK yesterday, I called on AI companies and innovators to work with the Government to build national-scale AI cyber-defence capabilities, and announced that a further £90 million will be invested to boost cyber-resilience. I also visited His Majesty’s Naval Base Clyde, where the Government are investing £250 million to strengthen our national security and deter our adversaries.
Adam Thompson
Happy St George’s day, Mr Speaker. Erewash is home to many workers whose labour is vital to national security, employed at firms such as Rolls-Royce or at our many small and medium-sized advanced manufacturers, building things like jet engine parts. Although we have broadly been kept out of Donald Trump’s war on Iran, many global threats still loom. What steps will the Government take to protect British workers and secure supply chains for the UK defence industry?
Dan Jarvis
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that important point. The UK’s defence industry is a cornerstone of our national security and an engine for growth. We are committed to spending £2.5 billion more with defence SMEs and recently launched the Defence Office for Small Business Growth, a key driver to improve SME access to defence opportunities. The £31 billion that we spend annually with the defence industry in the UK powers over 460,000 jobs and 24,000 apprenticeships nationwide, including many high-quality roles in the east midlands.
Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)
The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Darren Jones)
May I begin by wishing the Parliamentary Secretary at the Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Bury North (Mr Frith), a happy birthday, and noting the generosity and co-ordination of the House in not submitting a single question for him to answer today? I encourage Members to submit particularly difficult questions for him in future.
I will update the House on some of the work that I am leading in response to the war in the middle east. As part of our work with the new middle east response committee, I am chairing a new contingency planning ministerial group. It will focus on preparing for and mitigating, where possible, any impact on our economy and domestic security as a result of the conflict. I am convening relevant Secretaries of State twice a week, with their permanent secretaries, to scrutinise plans and ensure that we are prepared for different outcomes across major and relevant UK supply chains. The conflict in the middle east is not our war, and while we do not know how long it will last, we are acting now to protect the British people. I look forward to keeping the House updated on this work in the coming weeks and months.
Steve Race
I am sure that the Minister will join me in welcoming the result of the Hungarian election where, in part, anti-LGBT policies were roundly rejected at the ballot box. As LGBT rights suffer from backsliding around the world, will the Minister commit to working with our EU partners to promote LGBT human rights across the world, including by putting the topic on the agenda at the next EU-UK summit?
The Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Nick Thomas-Symonds)
The Government are absolutely committed to promoting and protecting the human rights of LGBT people worldwide. Our UK-EU security and defence partnership is underpinned by shared values, and I absolutely give that commitment. We will continue to work closely with EU partners to uphold those values.
Alex Burghart (Brentwood and Ongar) (Con)
Last week, someone in the heart of Government leaked some extremely sensitive documents to The Guardian. This appears potentially to be a crime under the National Security Act 2023. Has the Cabinet Office reported it to the Metropolitan police?
Darren Jones
As I confirmed to the House, I think, a day or so ago, a leak inquiry has begun. When further facts are established, we reserve the right to do so.
Alex Burghart
Cat Little, the permanent secretary, has just told the Foreign Affairs Committee that a very, very small number of people have actually seen the document in question. Will the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister commit to the House that when he has identified who leaked it, he will report them to the Metropolitan police?
Darren Jones
I can confirm that we take this matter deeply seriously and, as I say, we reserve the right to do so once the facts have been established through the inquiry.
Jo Platt (Leigh and Atherton) (Lab/Co-op)
Nick Thomas-Symonds
My hon. Friend talks powerfully about the impact of long covid, and it has had that impact on many people following the pandemic. The most recent module 3 report from the covid inquiry covered this issue in detail. Of course, the Government will carefully consider the inquiry’s work on this in our full response—it absolutely should.
Mr Peter Bedford (Mid Leicestershire) (Con)
Darren Jones
We are working in co-operation with the Metropolitan police. As the hon. Member would expect, and as I am sure the House would agree, we do not want to do anything that would interfere with the police process.
Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)
The Minister of State, Cabinet Office (Dan Jarvis)
In the national security strategy, the Government made an historic commitment to spend 5% of our GDP on national security by 2025. That includes funding to protect critical infrastructure, ensure civil preparedness and resilience, unleash innovation and strengthen our defence industrial base. We are currently working through proposals for the UK to meet the 1.5% NATO commitment, and we will set out our detailed plans in due course.
John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)
Darren Jones
As I have said from the Dispatch Box, the victims of Jeffrey Epstein want to see justice. A criminal investigation by the police is under way, and it is right that the House does not interfere with that process and works with the Metropolitan police to allow them to undertake their work.
Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Chris Ward)
My hon. Friend raises an important point. He is right about the reforms that we are trying to make to public procurement, and to improve our number of electric vehicles. I will write to him with the specifics on the Government Car Service.
Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)
Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)
Happy St George’s day, Mr Speaker.
When Jaguar Land Rover was the victim of a cyber-attack, it had a devastating impact on the supply chain in Redditch. Will the proposed cyber-resilience index, which is part of the Government’s welcome focus on improving cyber-security and national security, be subject to parliamentary scrutiny?
Dan Jarvis
We recognise the serious disruption that incidents such as the attack on JLR can cause for supply chains and local economies. We continually assess the resilience of our critical national infrastructure. The proposed cyber-resilience index will support improved accountability, and we are considering appropriate mechanisms to ensure parliamentary scrutiny as it is developed.
Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)
Chris Ward
As I have said, one aim of the Government’s procurement reforms is to ensure that we support more British companies and end the reliance on external suppliers. The two Palantir contracts that the hon. Gentleman mentions are for the NHS and defence, so it is best to take the matter up with the Department of Health and Social Care and the Ministry of Defence, which are the relevant Departments.
Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)
In Derby we have many businesses, including small and medium-sized businesses, that are investing in people through apprenticeships or by enabling people to turn their lives around after prison through work. How will reforms to public procurement better recognise the social value that businesses provide when making procurement decisions?
Chris Ward
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise that. Social value should be integral to the system, but the current system has become too tick-boxy and does not deliver what it needs to for local communities like those in Derby. We are working with businesses, unions and charities on a new definition. I am happy to speak with her further about it, but I think it is an important part of improving the system.
Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)
If the Government are so confident in the Prime Minister’s decision to sack Sir Olly Robbins, will the Minister today rule out settling any employment tribunal in advance of a hearing or imposing any gagging orders on Mr Robbins?
Darren Jones
The House will understand that I am not at liberty to comment on a potential ongoing employment dispute.
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
I am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister for confirming that he will chair a new contingency planning ministerial group to develop resilience to the threats caused as a result of the conflict, which is not, of course, ours, but is having an impact on many other countries across the world, potentially resulting in shortages and inflation. Our resilience is dependent on their resilience. In that light, will my right hon. Friend agree to consider convening a global summit to increase resilience through co-operation and collaboration?
Darren Jones
I thank my hon. Friend for her excellent question. I can confirm that the Foreign Office is part of our contingency planning work at the centre of Government. On all issues, we look at the international data available to us, and the Foreign Office will keep that in consideration when trying to support allies and partners, as well as ensuring security and resilience for the UK.
Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)
Over the Easter weekend, a 6-acre site in the Chilterns national landscape saw a massive unauthorised development. Despite swift action from Dacorum borough council to issue a temporary stop notice and an injunction, the work continued, with the police powerless to stop it and the council without the resources. What will the Minister do through cross-departmental work to uphold the rule of law and protect our precious landscapes?
Darren Jones
I think any constituency MP would find those circumstances utterly unacceptable. If the hon. Member writes to me, I will ensure that I pass the information to colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to see what we can do.
Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)
A happy St George’s day to you, Mr Speaker. Global turbulence has driven up the cost of living for my constituents. Can the Minister set out how closening trading ties with our closest allies through the EU reset will help bring down prices for my constituents?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
That is why the EU-UK reset is so important, as it will help us in bearing down on fuel bills and energy bills, which will help my hon. Friend’s constituents.
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)
In February, Capita said to Eastbourne resident Keith that his civil service pension would be paid by March. By March, it said his pension would be paid in April. Now it says that it will not be paid before May. How will the Minister intervene to hold this cowboy corporate to account?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
The Cabinet Office has been withholding milestone payments from Capita. We have a robust recovery plan, which says that full contractual service has to be restored by the end of June. I have been absolutely clear that I will consider all options at that moment, but I would be grateful if the hon. Member could write to me with the details of his constituent’s case.
Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)
Happy St George’s day to you, Mr Speaker. Can the Minister set out what progress the Government have made in cracking down on fraudsters who seek to defraud the public sector and what success they have had in clawing back money on behalf of hard-working taxpayers?
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Satvir Kaur)
The Government have taken robust action through our Public Sector Fraud Authority. There is a huge amount of work being done. In fact, last year we saved the public purse more than £7.5 billion. A lot has been done, but there is lots more to do, and I am happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss that further.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
Happy St George’s day, Mr Speaker. A business I met recently raised concerns about grid resilience to Chinese sabotage. Given the precedent set on Huawei and 5G, what steps is the Cabinet Office taking to exclude high-risk Chinese components from our critical energy infrastructure?
Dan Jarvis
If the hon. Member would like to write to me, I would be happy to look at the details of what she has raised. She will understand that I do not want to get into the detail of it now, but I give her an assurance that we look very carefully at all these matters and take decisions in our national security interests.
Gregory Stafford
In response to my question about Jonathan Powell’s security clearance, the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister said:
“I do not have that information to hand.”
Mr Speaker
Clive, I do not need any help from you. You have been here long enough, like me—leave it to me to do my job, and I will let you do yours.
Gregory Stafford
Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister said that he did not have the information to hand but did not indicate whether he was going to let me know what the answer was when he did have that information to hand. If the Chief Secretary does not provide me with a written answer to that question, what opportunities do I have in this House to get him to answer it?
Mr Speaker
I think we are trying to prolong an argument that you have already had. I do not think we need to worry, because I know you have the ability and certainly the time to pursue it in every manner possible.
Business of the House
(1 day, 12 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)
Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?
The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)
The business for the week commencing 27 April will include:
Monday 27 April—If necessary, consideration of a Lords message on the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, followed by consideration of a Lords message on the Pension Schemes Bill, followed by consideration of a carry-over motion relating to the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, followed by consideration of a carry-over motion relating to the Public Office (Accountability) Bill, followed by, if necessary, consideration of a Lords message on the Crime and Policing Bill, followed by, if necessary, consideration of a Lords message on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill.
Tuesday 28 April—If necessary, consideration of a Lords message on the Pension Schemes Bill, followed by, if necessary, consideration of a Lords message on the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, followed by, if necessary, consideration of Lords messages.
Wednesday 29 April—If necessary, consideration of Lords messages.
Thursday 30 April—If necessary, consideration of Lords messages.
The House will be prorogued when Royal Assent to all Acts has been signified.
John Lamont
May I start by congratulating the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean) on the birth of his daughter, baby Lyla? I am sure the whole House will join me in wishing him and his family well.
Last weekend, I met the friends and family of Jamie Tweedie as they walked the St Cuthbert’s Way from Melrose to Holy Island, raising over £25,000 for the Scottish Brain Tumour Research Centre of Excellence. Jamie was a local farmer in the Borders who tragically lost his life to a brain tumour just under a year ago. I know their efforts will help advance treatments for that devastating disease.
We are all watching the development of peace talks between the US and Iran. For the good of our economy and in the interests of bringing energy bills down for households and businesses, we all hope to see a swift end to the conflict.
Turning to domestic politics, after weeks of chaos, this may be the lowest point yet for this Government—a Prime Minister putting his own interests above the national interest. He has already had four chiefs of staff, five directors of communications, three Cabinet Secretaries and four principal private secretaries. Does the Leader of the House agree that perhaps the problem lies with the Prime Minister himself? On Tuesday, the Foreign Affairs Committee heard extraordinary evidence from Olly Robbins, the former permanent secretary at the Foreign Office. He described a dismissive attitude in Downing Street towards vetting, and “constant pressure” to appoint Peter Mandelson to the most senior diplomatic role. He also told MPs that he was asked to give the Prime Minister’s then director of communications a senior diplomatic post—without informing the Foreign Secretary, it would seem. The Foreign Office is not a redeployment pool for failed political advisers.
Can the Leader of the House tell us whether it was appropriate for No. 10 to apply such pressure over Mandelson’s vetting, or does he accept that due process was not followed? Does he believe the Prime Minister inadvertently misled the House? Does the Leader of the House accept that the Prime Minister continues to make statements that are hard to reconcile with reality? Can the Leader of the House explain why Olly Robbins was sacked? Was it right and fair to sack him?
The Prime Minister has never looked weaker. The Prime Minister is so weak that he has brought forward the moment of Prorogation to avoid another bruising Prime Minister’s questions. He has already lost the confidence of the entire country. When will Labour MPs finally stand up for their constituents and join us in removing this dreadful Prime Minister?
While the Prime Minister is consumed by internal chaos, the issues that matter to our constituents are being ignored. Energy bills are soaring, particularly for those in rural communities who rely on heating oil, people are struggling to find work, and decisions on funding our national defence are being delayed, despite global threats. At the same time, Government Back Benchers and Cabinet members brief against each other, plotting over the Prime Minister’s future. As this parliamentary Session draws to a close, I doubt it will be remembered fondly by those on the Government Benches.
In two weeks’ time, voters will go to the polls in important elections across England and in parliamentary elections in Scotland and Wales. In Scotland, Labour’s campaign has descended into confusion, illustrated by the remarkable sight of the Prime Minister visiting the nuclear base at Faslane, while avoiding any contact with his own party leader in Scotland, Anas Sarwar. It seemed that the Prime Minister needed the protection of the nuclear deterrent from his own Scottish Labour colleagues. This Government have found it easier to locate secret Russian submarines in the north Atlantic than to find the Scottish Labour leader in the south side of Glasgow.
Across Scotland, voters are clear: they are tired of an SNP Government distracted from delivery and focused on independence. But people are not powerless. The peach-coloured regional ballot paper gives voters the opportunity to prevent another SNP majority, as they did in 2016 and 2021. The results of another SNP majority in Scotland would be similar to those of the current Labour majority in this House: more broken promises, more chaos and more division. Does the Leader of the House agree that whether at Westminster or at Holyrood, Governments deserve to be judged harshly if they do not stick to their promises and they inflict chaos on our country?
Sir Alan Campbell
I join the hon. Gentleman in welcoming the birth of Lyla, and I wish her and her parents all the very best indeed.
I wish everybody a happy St George’s day today. During this week, we have celebrated the centenary of the birth of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, and it has been announced that a trust will be established in honour of the life of the late Queen. The trust will focus on restoring shared spaces in communities, reflecting the late Queen’s commitment to public service, inspired by the belief that everyone is our neighbour—a lesson that we should all seek to live by.
Last week, the Government made clear their commitment to tackling antisemitic attacks. Following the incident this week, I restate our position that attacks on British Jews are an attack on all of us. We will do whatever it takes to stop those who seek to intimidate our Jewish communities.
We are approaching the end of the Session, which, at its conclusion, will have seen the delivery of more than 50 Government Bills. We will continue to build on that in the next Session.
A statement was made to the House to provide an update on Capita and civil service pensions. I know that Members across the House will have welcomed that update. I assure hon. Members that the issues that they raise with me in this forum are heard by the Government and, where we can, the Government act.
Before I turn to the remarks made by the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont), may I wish everyone taking part in the London marathon this Sunday, including all the Members of the House who are participating, the very best of luck?
I join the hon. Gentleman in saying how saddened we are to learn about the death of Jamie Tweedie, which came far too soon. His friends and family are ensuring that we remember him and that he is not forgotten, and his untimely death leaves a legacy of which they should be proud.
The hon. Gentleman mentioned the peace talks. I join him in hoping that they are successful. We want the ceasefire to continue. We want to ensure that the strait of Hormuz is open; otherwise, as he points out, it will prolong the expected economic damage, not just to our economy but to others. I want to put it on the record that what has unfolded in that part of the world demonstrates that the Prime Minister’s judgment on not joining the war in the first place was absolutely correct. He has spent his time making diplomatic efforts, working with others, to ensure that the strait of Hormuz is open at the earliest opportunity.
Let me turn to the hon. Gentleman’s remarks on domestic politics. He is perfectly entitled to make his case, but let me remind the House that the Prime Minister came here at the earliest opportunity on Monday and faced questions on Peter Mandelson for two and a half hours. That was followed by an emergency debate for three hours on Tuesday in which Members had an opportunity to make their case and ask their questions. Yesterday, the Prime Minister faced Prime Minister’s questions for about 45 minutes, in which he was questioned extensively on the issue. The Foreign Affairs Committee is doing its job in holding decision makers to account. There have been numerous opportunities—including at Cabinet Office questions, which has just finished—for other questions to be put. I and the Government cannot be held responsible for the fact that the Leader of the Opposition has been so hopeless during these events that she cannot hold the Government to account effectively. [Interruption.]
Let me just mention the question of Prorogation, because the hon. Gentleman has clearly been reading too many newspapers. I have just read out to the House that the business next week—[Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. Mr Stafford, please, you are getting very carried away. Enjoy yourself on the Front Bench, but it is not the place to be thrown out from.
Sir Alan Campbell
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
I have just read out the business, which includes, if necessary, Wednesday and Thursday, when we will be dealing with Lords amendments. The hon. Gentleman asked about PMQs; if the House is still sitting, PMQs will take place. I would imagine, too, that business questions will take place if we are still sitting on Thursday. Nothing in what I read out suggests anything that is not usual.
The hon. Gentleman talked about the record of this Government and went on to talk about what is happening in Scotland. Let me disagree with him about the way in which this Government will be judged. The borrowing figures show that we are borrowing less than at any time in the past four years, unemployment has come down, inflation and interest rates were falling, and waiting lists are coming down, too. I accept that we are facing the turmoil of the fallout from the situation in the middle east, but when such events happen, as a result of the action that we have taken in the last two years, this country is much better placed to see out those challenges than we were under the previous Government.
Finally, I agree with the hon. Gentleman in what he said about the situation north of the border, at least as it pertains to the SNP. Voters suggest that they are tiring of the SNP Government; after two decades in government, it is time for change. The SNP Government have had the biggest settlement since devolution, and they are failing across the board on public services. I expect that voters will want to take the opportunity to make their position clear. Let me finally disagree with the hon. Gentleman, because the way to do that is to vote Labour.
Gareth Thomas (Harrow West) (Lab/Co-op)
In Harrow, getting a free car parking space is often critical to whether someone can access vital public services, and it is crucial for local businesses, too. My right hon. Friend will therefore understand my constituents’ frustration that Conservative-run Harrow council has axed free weekend and evening parking in North Harrow, Harrow town centre and Wealdstone. With Harrow Labour determined to reverse that, may we have a debate on the guidance that Ministers might offer councils on the importance of listening to residents’ and businesses’ concerns about access to free parking?
Sir Alan Campbell
I certainly share my hon. Friend’s frustration on those matters. We have heard on many occasions in these sessions how much they are of interest to our constituents. It is disappointing to say the least that charges may prevent people from accessing services. My hon. Friend put on record today his concern on behalf of his constituents. If he wants to amplify that, I would encourage him to apply for an Adjournment debate. I hope that when the time comes his residents are given the opportunity to show their frustration at the ballot box.
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)
I am here subbing for my hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean), who, as has already been mentioned, welcomed his new daughter late last Thursday. I am very pleased to tell the House that mum Gemma and baby Lyla are both doing very well indeed.
Yesterday, the Public Accounts Committee published a report that raises serious concerns about the resilience of the new hospital programme. This project has already been riddled with delays and spiralling costs, and it now faces further risk from a volatile global economy. The Office for National Statistics inflation figures, which were also released yesterday, add to the concerns, as they confirm what many feared: “Trumpflation” is having an effect on our economy. UK prices rose by 3.3% in the 12 months to March, driven largely by the biggest increase in fuel costs for over three years—a direct consequence of Trump’s reckless war in Iran and the effective closure of the strait of Hormuz.
Capital infrastructure projects, such as the new hospital programme, are acutely vulnerable to exactly that kind of supply disruption and inflationary pressure. In my area, Stepping Hill hospital already faces a £130 million repair backlog, crumbling buildings, flooded corridors and years of broken promises. Will the Government make time for a debate on the impact of global economic instability on UK investment and public infrastructure, and on their plan to ensure that patients, including those depending on hospitals such as Stepping Hill, are not left waiting even longer for the facilities they need?
Sir Alan Campbell
Let me repeat my best wishes to Gemma and Lyla.
The previous Government’s ambition to deliver 40 new hospitals by 2030 was not achievable; neither was it funded properly. We have conducted a review of the programme and, alongside the record £13.6 billion of capital investment in the NHS last year, we have put the new hospital programme on a sustainable footing and a more realistic timetable. We are keeping delivery on track, responding to changes in healthcare needs, and working closely with the relevant NHS trusts to accelerate progress wherever possible, but the hon. Lady is right to remind us of the potential economic fallout from the volatile international situation.
The Chancellor updated the House earlier this week on the Government’s response to events in the middle east, because the war in Iran will come at a cost. However, the Government have had the right economic plan to keep costs down and, at the same time, to invest in public services, and we will continue to do so. I except that as the situation unfolds, the Chancellor will want to keep the House updated.
Cat Eccles (Stourbridge) (Lab)
Following the Environment Act 2021, all councils in England were required to introduce food waste collections and improved kerbside recycling by April this year. Despite the long lead time, Tory-run Dudley council waited till the 11th hour, leaving it ill prepared for the changes and without the vehicles needed to complete the collections. That has left waste uncollected and cardboard strewn over the streets, and crews have been working hard around the clock to catch up. Residents have played their part and complied with the new rules. Does the Leader of the House agree that Dudley council must meet its obligations to residents, and provide accountability and answers for its failures on basics such as waste collection?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is a champion for both her constituents and the wider community, and I thank her for consistently raising the issues that matter most to them. This is not the first time that the failures of Conservative-run Dudley council have been brought to my attention. I thank the residents and crews who are stepping up, but I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend that Tory-run Dudley council needs to clean up its act.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
I begin by paying tribute to the late Brian Jones, who died overnight, aged 89, at Northwick Park hospital. Brian was either president or chairman of the Harrow East Conservative Association for 25 years, and he was also my election agent for three general elections. He was a distinguished civil servant who worked on international trade matters before he retired, and he was the district scout commissioner in Harrow. He will be sorely missed, and we obviously express our sadness to his relatives and friends.
I suspect that these will be the last business questions before Prorogation. As is usual at the end of a Session, I shall write to the Leader of the House, on behalf of the Backbench Business Committee, with a list of debates that are still on our waiting list. We have debates for the Chamber until the Christmas recess; for Tuesday mornings in Westminster Hall until the November recess; and for Thursdays in Westminster Hall until the conference recess. If the Leader of the House wants to have any general debates before the Committee is reconstituted following state opening, there is a long list of them. I thank him for laying the Standing Orders, but when will they be considered by the House? I pay tribute to the members of the Backbench Business Committee, the Clerks and the other support services, who have done such a brilliant job assisting us in formulating the debates that we have had.
There have been recent attacks on Jewish communities across north London. The recent arrests of individuals that have taken place are welcome, but Jewish people will be thinking twice about whether they should go to synagogue this weekend and whether they will be safe. It is imperative that the Government not only take measures to reassure Jewish people in this country, but take prompt action. The individuals perpetrating these evil attacks are controlled by Iranians; it is often Iranian diplomats or other third parties who are directing these operations. We must put a stop to what is going on in radicalising our young people and using them as stooges for the Iranian regime. Will the Leader of the House encourage the Security Minister to take prompt action to round up the individuals instructing these evil people so that Jewish people can feel safe once again in this country?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee for his work and the work of his Committee. I also thank him in anticipation of receiving his letter about the topics that are still around to be debated. As he points out, although it may take some time to get the Committee running again, there may well be an opportunity for general debates, and I thank him for that.
Let me say something about Brian Jones. He was in a different party to me, but that does not matter, because people like him are important not just in their communities, but for the working of local politics. We need to appreciate that, and I join the hon. Gentleman and all Members in sending our condolences to Brian’s friends and family.
The hon. Gentleman mentions the Backbench Business Committee motions, and he is right that we have tabled them. He seeks to draw me on when they will be dealt with, so let me use a parliamentary term: shortly. In this case I really mean “shortly”, so he can work out whatever that means.
I join the hon. Gentleman in his remarks about antisemitism, because the House shares the view that all religious hatred is abhorrent and has no place in our society. We are shocked by the recent attacks and, as I said in my opening remarks, we stand with the Jewish community. We thank counter-terror officers for their work, and we are working with the Community Security Trust to keep the community safe.
The hon. Gentleman has drawn our attention previously to the question of whether legislation is robust enough. We are bringing forward new legislation in the Crime and Policing Bill, but should we need to go further, I will draw his remarks to the attention of the Security Minister.
Emily Darlington (Milton Keynes Central) (Lab)
Mr Speaker, you and I agree that all women and girls should be safe on this estate, whether they are MPs, staff or visitors. We have been working together to ensure that we become the first White Ribbon-accredited Parliament in the world. What progress is being made to ensure that that accreditation is in place for this House by the next International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, so that we can all celebrate that this is a safe place for every woman and girl who chooses to work or visit here?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend has been an assiduous supporter of the White Ribbon accreditation process and has been working on it from the very beginning. I can reconfirm for her that we are committed to making the UK Parliament the first to have White Ribbon accreditation. The House of Commons Commission has established the necessary leads to start accreditation, and an action plan has been drafted and is on track to be launched in the near future.
Mr Speaker
Since I was brought into that question, I just want to add that the Leader of the House is absolutely correct. We are almost there, and almost ready to bring it forward.
Sir Jeremy Wright (Kenilworth and Southam) (Con)
With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, I want to raise three points with the Leader of the House about the operation of the Humble Address agreed by the House on 4 February. I make clear that I do so on behalf of the Intelligence and Security Committee. First, I invite the Leader of the House to confirm that under the terms of the Humble Address, no one within Government has the right to withhold, deny or not disclose the existence of any document within the scope of the Humble Address.
Secondly, as the Leader of the House knows, the exemptions set out in the Humble Address that relate to the Intelligence and Security Committee are about redactions that need to be made to protect either national security or international relations. Beyond that, the Government produced a document to go along with the first disclosure of material on 11 March, which set out a number of grounds on which the Government would also seek to redact information. If you will permit me, Mr Speaker, I will quote what they are. The document mentions
“Individuals’ email addresses and phone numbers; the identities of junior civil servants; personal data of third parties where this is not in scope of the motion; and legal professional privilege.”
It also makes reference to a
“small amount of Peter Mandelson’s personal data”,
and then says that
“It may also be necessary for the government to make further redactions in future publications based on other public interest principles, including commercially sensitive information.”
I invite the Leader of the House to confirm that if the Government intend to do so, they need to come to this House to explain what those grounds for redaction will be, because—as I hope he will agree—they are not covered by the terms of the Humble Address as it stands. It is important that the House has the chance to validate the Government’s view that further redactions would be appropriate.
My third point is about redactions on grounds other than national security or international relations. As the Leader of the House knows, the Committee I am part of is going through documents now to confirm that the redactions the Government propose to make are appropriate on the grounds of national security or international relations, but no one is doing the same work in relation to redactions that the Government seek to make for other reasons. Should they not be, and should there not be an opportunity for someone in this House to look at the unredacted versions of those documents, to confirm that the redactions the Government are seeking to make are appropriate?
Sir Alan Campbell
First, I place on record our gratitude to the Intelligence and Security Committee for its time and its consideration of the large number of documents that it is reviewing. Further documents have been gathered, and the Government are working at pace to ensure that the ISC has all the relevant documentation as soon as possible. On Tuesday 21 April, the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister committed to the House that
“we will release that further material shortly, subject to the processes ongoing with the Metropolitan police”—
which I know the right hon. and learned Gentleman understands—
“and the Intelligence and Security Committee, and we will continue to keep Members updated as we make progress.”—[Official Report, 21 April 2026; Vol. 784, c. 235.]
The Prime Minister has been very clear that he expects us to make progress as quickly as possible, but as the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, there are literally mountains of documents to wade through.
As for what the ISC was asked to do, I do not believe that that has fundamentally changed. My view, which I have expressed in one of these sessions, is that the Government would be wise to get as much information as possible out as quickly as possible, and to do as little redaction as possible. However, if I have understood him correctly, the right hon. and learned Gentleman raises an interesting question about what the Government have subsequently said about what they might or might not do. I want to go away and think about that, because from what he has said—and I trust him absolutely on these matters—it does seem somewhat at odds. Were the Government to change those terms, I would expect them to come to this House and do so.
Jim McMahon (Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton) (Lab/Co-op)
Happy St George’s day to you, Mr Speaker, and to the House, and what better day is there to reflect that the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill will soon receive Royal Assent? With it come enhanced powers to safeguard community assets, including automatic protection for sporting grounds. This important Co-operative party campaign reflects the real community of Britain, with decent people pulling together, protecting what is important to them. Does the Leader of the House agree that now we are soon to have these widened protections, we also need widened ownership and to bring forward a new community ownership fund?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for his work on these matters, including as a Minister and shadow Minister. He brings valuable insight. I cannot give him a commitment on the fund, but I believe that we need to go further on these issues. As the Government have made clear, communities should, wherever possible, be put in the driving seat in terms of not only their resources and the decisions they have to make, but the assets at their disposal.
David Davis (Goole and Pocklington) (Con)
St George’s day is certainly a day to celebrate patriotism. This morning, The Daily Telegraph reported that the Attorney General, when he was in private practice, voluntarily gave advice on the pursuit of British soldiers over alleged war crimes—allegations that turned out to be bogus. The article says that he realised those claims could be bogus early on in the process. That brings into question his impartiality in advising the Government on matters of human rights law as they apply to soldiers. He should therefore recuse himself from giving advice on those matters generally, but especially on the Northern Ireland legislation, which as it stands will victimise more British soldiers. Can we have a debate on Government legal advice and the shameful misuse of human rights law in pursuit of our soldiers?
Sir Alan Campbell
As I said in announcing the business, there may be an opportunity before the end of this Session to return to the question of the legacy Bill. There will certainly be an opportunity as soon as we come back to return to it. The right hon. Gentleman may wish to make those remarks during those debates. Knowing the Attorney General as I do, I am sure that he approaches these questions in an absolutely correct way. Should a situation arise where he feels that he should recuse himself, I have absolute faith that he would make the right judgment.
Ian Byrne (Liverpool West Derby) (Lab)
I warmly welcome the Government’s tabling of the carry-over motion for the Hillsborough law. A lot of people who were extremely worried about what was happening will be relieved today. However, that motion must be matched with urgency. Ministers must end the delays and deliver the law in full, as promised, without carve-outs for the intelligence and security services. That will achieve the cultural change that the country desperately needs, as we have seen this week. Will my right hon. Friend remind some in government that negative media briefings against key figures in the campaign risk undermining confidence in the process and should cease? Following the Prime Minister’s commitment at PMQs last week, will my right hon. Friend ensure that I am directly informed and included in all meetings and briefings moving forward as the parliamentary lead for the Hillsborough law campaign?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend not just for his questions, but for his record on this matter. I know that he has a personal interest as someone who was at Hillsborough on that terrible day. As he says, we have tabled the carry-over motion, and I am pleased that he welcomes it. Briefings against anyone are never welcome, wherever they come from. I hope that those who might have briefed hear his words. In terms of keeping him updated, I will certainly draw his remarks to the attention of the relevant Minister.
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
I had the opportunity to test out my hand-eye co-ordination recently by joining Chichester Centurions hockey club. We have a thriving hockey community in Chichester, and Chichester hockey club has more than 650 members. They are at risk, however, of losing their pitch provision because the pitches are coming to end of life and are being replaced with 3G pitches, which are far more favourable to football—hockey cannot be played on them. Will the Leader of the House please talk to the Sport Minister, the hon. Member for Barnsley South (Stephanie Peacock), and ask what she can do, because the picture in my area is happening nationally? Will he please ask her to meet me, so that she can tell me what she will do to protect hockey?
Sir Alan Campbell
I will draw the hon. Lady’s remarks and concerns to the attention of the appropriate Minister, and see if we can arrange the meeting she requests.
Jo Platt (Leigh and Atherton) (Lab/Co-op)
As Members will know, this week Parliament welcomed Prestur, the wonderful Icelandic horse showcasing the value of animal-assisted and community-based support for neurodivergent people. May I personally thank you for that, Mr Speaker? I am sure you agree that we have never seen so many fat smiles on MPs’ faces as we did with Prestur. The event had a serious purpose, which was to highlight the strength of neurodiversity and the difference that inclusive, non-clinical environments make to wellbeing, emotional regulation and connection. Does my right hon. Friend agree that such support helps embed neuro-inclusion in our communities? As we shift from hospital to community care, how can we best champion such initiatives so that all people can thrive?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is a champion on this matter for her constituents and, indeed, more widely. I thank her for her work as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. I do agree with her, but more importantly, the Government more widely agree with her that such community-based support is vital, and in raising this matter in the House today, she has highlighted the case even more.
Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst (Solihull West and Shirley) (Con)
Phoenix shops are a blight on many of our high streets, including in my constituency of Solihull West and Shirley. Councillor Karen Grinsell, the leader of Solihull metropolitan borough council, recently brought forward a motion to have greater statutory powers to close down these stores. Will the Leader of the House provide Government time to debate this issue so that we can close these stores for good?
Sir Alan Campbell
As I have said, there may well be such an opportunity after the King’s Speech, when the Government will have more time for general debates, and I will certainly consider the hon. Gentleman’s request.
Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby) (Lab)
Last month, I was thrilled to see Scarborough rugby union football club crowned regional 2 north-east champions—the highest level in the club’s history. The club does brilliant work in the Scarborough community, with various teams for women and for rugby players of all levels. Will the Leader of the House join me in celebrating Scarborough RUFC’s historic victory and its vital contribution to Scarborough?
Sir Alan Campbell
I certainly join my hon. Friend in congratulating Scarborough RUFC on its success. Not only that club, but rugby clubs across our country are so important in local sports. Very often, they are at the heart of our local communities because, moving beyond the sport they play, they get involved in all sorts of other things, and I thank rugby clubs for everything they do.
Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)
First, I am grateful to the Leader of the House for bringing my previous concerns about the management of visa cases in the Home Office to the Department’s attention. However, at the moment I have a very acute issue with immediate support needs. A constituent of mine is in the USA, where his baby was born through surrogacy. Unfortunately, the baby has been very unwell, and he has not yet been able to complete the formalities for a British passport, although they do hold a US one. My constituent’s ESTA—electronic system for travel authorisation—is running out, and he desperately wants to get back to Scotland with his baby, who needs further medical care. In the absence of any remaining Home Office questions, will the Leader of the House advise me who could urgently offer some support to bring this case to a conclusion?
Sir Alan Campbell
If the hon. Lady lets me have the details of that case immediately after this session, I will see what we can do. While I am on my feet, let me wish her well for her run on Sunday.
Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)
Changes to Northumberland county council’s council tax support scheme have left some low-income residents in my constituency facing unaffordable increases, some of nearly £100 per month. Those impacted are the most vulnerable in our communities. Can the Leader of the House imagine what it is like, when they are already struggling to survive through the cost of living crisis, to be lumped with paying an extra £100 per month? That is pressure, Mr Speaker. Can we have a debate on the impact that local authorities can have, both positively and negatively, on the financial wellbeing of our constituents and their constituents?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to that decision by Northumberland county council. It cannot be right, even after 14 years of under-investment by successive Tory Administrations, that less well-off households in his area are being asked to pay more. This Government are taking action so we can keep costs down for everyone and provide support for those who need it more. But the lesson that people need to learn, unfortunately by experience, in areas such as his is this: do not vote for a Tory or a Reform council.
Robbie Moore (Keighley and Ilkley) (Con)
Last July, my constituent Caroline decided to take out her civil service pension after 37 years working in the tax office in Shipley. Nine months later and she has still not received a single penny of the tens of thousands of pounds she is entitled to, despite many emails, messages and phone calls. Caroline is at her wits’ end, as are many of my constituents in similar scenarios. Capita initially promised to return to normalcy in February 2026, but the goalposts have been moved to June. Will the Leader of the House grant a debate in Government time on Capita’s mismanagement of the civil service pension scheme?
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Gentleman raises an issue that has been raised many times during these sessions. As I mentioned earlier in my remarks, one effect of that was that a Minister did come to the House to give a statement on Capita. I am sure that they will continue to do so. If this situation continues, as we return after the King’s Speech, he is certainly making a good case for us to find time to have a debate on this issue.
Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)
In September, Uber intends to roll out driverless taxis on UK roads, after the Government gave permission to companies to put driverless vehicles on our roads. This is causing concern among Uber drivers, who feel they are not being consulted by their employers about the impact it might have on their future employment. My right hon. Friend will recall P&O Ferries sacking its staff without notice and taking on foreign agency staff. There is very little difference with what Uber seems to be doing with its staff over the roll-out of driverless vehicles. May we have a statement from the Department for Transport? We do not want the Government featherbedding the sacking of existing staff in the way that P&O Ferries treated its staff in 2022.
Sir Alan Campbell
We certainly do not. I understand my hon. Friend’s concerns and the concerns of Uber drivers. Of course, we would want to see companies consult with their employees and hopefully give them reassurance going forward, but I will take up his concerns directly with Ministers to ensure that we are doing everything we can to get ahead of this particular game.
Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)
The Iranian war has caused a huge spike in fuel prices for all drivers, but this is especially true for businesses in Caerfyrddin and rural Wales. Ammanford construction business TRJ has been deeply affected, along with haulage companies such as Tony Powell Transport, which has seen costs increase by £7,000 a week. Transport costs for all Caerfyrddin businesses will inevitably result in higher prices, including for food and essentials, for all our constituents. I appreciate that the 5p cut in fuel duty will continue until October, but can the Leader of the House ask the Chancellor to help businesses by using the additional taxation received through the increased fuel price by further cutting fuel duty?
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Lady is right to draw attention to the concerns about the possible economic fallout from the current situation in the middle east. As she points out, we are already taking action. We had already extended the 5p cut in fuel duty until September. We are also working at pace with our International Energy Agency partners on a co-ordinated release of oil stocks to the market, with the UK contributing 13.5 million barrels. The Chancellor and the Energy Secretary have met the petrol retail industry to make clear that drivers must get a fair deal, whether they are haulage drivers or domestic drivers. We need to make sure that competition is kept open and that the competition watchdog is vigilant on price gouging.
As the Chancellor and the Prime Minister have both said, we are keeping the situation under review. We are also keeping under review the cost of red diesel, which I know will be more important in some areas, in particular rural areas, than it might be in others. We have also taken action on heating oil, which again is probably more of a prevalent concern in areas like hers than it is in some urban areas.
To respond to what the hon. Lady said about the money that the Chancellor is meant to be getting in through taxation as a result of rising fuel prices. That is false economics; it does not exist. It may be that the receipts are coming in through one door, but they are going out through another because costs to Government rise, too. We should not try to—I know she is not trying to—kid people that somehow this is a benefit to the Chancellor. The Chancellor does not want this to happen and it is not as straightforward as the hon. Lady has said.
Liz Twist (Blaydon and Consett) (Lab)
I recently had the chance to speak to air cadets at 1509 (Blaydon) Squadron, my local air training corps, where I received a good grilling on the job of an MP and on a wide range of issues affecting the cadets. They told me how they are learning practical and social skills, as well as being provided with training and outdoor pursuits by the RAF. Can we have a debate in Government time on how we can continue to build on the work of our cadet services to benefit our young people?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is right to champion the good work of the cadets and the impact on young people. We are committed to the joint Department for Education and Ministry of Defence cadet expansion programme, complementing our national youth strategy. I encourage my hon. Friend to perhaps apply for an Adjournment debate to hear directly from Ministers about not only the work we are undertaking to support the cadets, but what plans there are for the future.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
For far too long, mobile phone connectivity across Bromsgrove and the villages, Worcestershire and, frankly, the rest of the country has been woeful. I find it shocking that humanity can send a rocket to loop around the moon and back, and yet we cannot get reliable mobile phone signal. This morning, I read in The Times and The Telegraph that Vodafone, Three, O2 and EE are considering rationing mobile phone connectivity in the light of surging energy costs. Will the Leader of the House allow for a debate in Government time on the adequacy of mobile phone connectivity—not just in rural areas, but across the whole country?
Sir Alan Campbell
We are all frustrated when there is no connectivity, particularly when travelling, but there is a wider and more important point here, which is the economic cost, particularly in rural areas but also across the country. I am not aware of what those providers are saying, but I will draw the hon. Gentleman’s remarks and concerns to the attention of the relevant Ministers to ensure that they are sighted of this, as I am sure they are. I will get him an update on these matters.
Andy MacNae (Rossendale and Darwen) (Lab)
I wish you a splendid St George’s day, Mr Speaker.
My constituent Milly Mulcahy is a wheelchair user who is entirely reliant on a lift maintained by Lancashire county council to enter and leave her home. Since being installed six years ago, this lift has broken down constantly; every time it breaks down, Milly is trapped in her own home. It was completely broken for two months over Christmas, with the county council failing to respond to multiple requests. Engineers have confirmed that the lift will never work reliably and simply needs replacing, but the county council has refused to engage in a long-term solution. This flies in the face of common sense—thousands of pounds have been spent on engineer call-outs with nothing to show for it. Will the Leader of the House agree with me on calling on the Reform leadership at Lancashire county council to stop dodging the issue, do the job properly and give Milly the freedom she deserves?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend raises a very disturbing story, and I wish Milly well. We have heard time and again in these sessions that when Reform is in local government, it overpromises and underdelivers. I strongly encourage Lancashire county council to listen to my hon. Friend’s contribution and to do the right thing by Milly and people across his community and put this right.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
Many across the House will have watched “Dirty Business” last month and been shocked not only by the behaviour of the water companies, but by the deliberate deregulation and defunding of the agencies that are there to protect our environment. When Storm Chandra devastated homes in my constituency, particularly those in Sturminster Marshall, the Environment Agency door drops did not arrive until after the flooding had entered my constituents’ homes.
One of the causes of flooding is lack of maintenance of ditches by riparian owners. Even when the agency is able to raise it with owners, it has insufficient funding to take enforcement action, relying instead on neighbourly good will. As our climate changes and we have more frequent and severe flooding, will the Leader of the House consider a debate in Government time on the remit and capacity of the Environment Agency to keep us all safe?
Sir Alan Campbell
The previous Government should never have allowed the water sector to get into this state, with record levels of sewage spills and ageing infrastructure, and this Government are determined to put it right both through legislation and by encouraging and resourcing the Environment Agency. I will give consideration to what the hon. Member says about this matter, and she may wish to draw it directly to the attention of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
I understand the concerns about the Environment Agency when such things happen, but a lot of Environment Agency staff are doing a really good and really tough job, day in and day out, and we should send them our support.
Carolyn Harris (Neath and Swansea East) (Lab)
In May 2025, the all-party parliamentary group on beauty and wellbeing, which I chair, launched an inquiry into ultraviolet safety in the UK. Over nine months, we have taken evidence from the industry, academics, clinicians and those with lived experience to understand the dangers of overexposure and what more can be done to improve protection and reduce risks. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking all those who contributed and encouraging Ministers, brands and retailers to read our report very carefully when it is launched next month and to consider our very sensible recommendations?
Sir Alan Campbell
I join my hon. Friend in thanking all those who contributed to the inquiry, and I thank the members of the APPG for all their work on this vital issue. I join my hon. Friend in inviting all those in the sector to read the report when it is published, and I will draw her remarks directly to the attention of Ministers.
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
Yesterday I held a meeting with representatives from Hydrogen UK, a number of whose members have projects planned for my constituency. They expressed concern about the delay in the publication of the Government’s hydrogen strategy. The delay is costing these companies many thousands of pounds and may lead to them withdrawing investments, which would obviously be damaging for the local economy and the ambitions of the Government’s growth agenda. Will the Leader of the House arrange for an early statement from a Minister to announce the strategy to let us get moving with these projects?
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to raise this matter on behalf of businesses in his constituency, and I understand their uncertainty. We are absolutely committed to building a thriving hydrogen sector in the UK through our strategy, as he points out, but I will draw his concerns to the attention of Ministers. If we have the strategy and the energy, we need to get on with it.
Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)
We are tired of lazy stereotypes and assumptions in Slough, which is why we are tackling them head-on with our application to be the 2028 UK town of culture. I am sure the Leader of the House will agree that as a cultural, digital and economic powerhouse, with a young, diverse and talented population, Slough would be the ideal candidate. Does he also agree that, with projects already planned to improve skills, community cohesion and civic pride, the impact of winning this award would be transformational for our town?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this to the House, and he is absolutely right. Programmes like the UK town of culture have often been transformative experiences, with the impacts on people and places extending well beyond the title year. I hope to see the same transformation in the winning town.
I have to be diplomatic in wishing all the communities, including Chorley and Slough, well in their quest to be the town of culture. Even if they are not the outright winner, taking part in the process and being a runner-up is a considerable achievement, and it is often a boost to local people.
Before I sit down, Mr Speaker, I also want to mention that North Shields has a very strong case.
Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)
After years of Conservative failures to do so, Liberal Democrat councils across Harpenden and Berkhamsted are working hard to secure a local plan for housing. However, the Government’s work on top-down planning, which gives Dacorum an increase of about 40% in housing numbers and St Albans an increase of almost 90%, and the Government’s grey belt proposals are literally giving developers a field day in Harpenden and Berkhamsted—including in Tring, where we see proposed increases of about 40% across the village. Now that the Government are seeing the impact of that policy, will the Leader of the House help us to secure a debate on grey belt—and a visit from the Minister to see those green belt areas, which are supposedly grey belt, right on the Chilterns national landscape?
Sir Alan Campbell
The Government are clear that we wish to see brownfield sites prioritised wherever possible, but the reality is that we have ambitious targets for housing because the failure of the previous Government to build sufficient housing has left us with a housing crisis. It is true that local voices should be heard in this process, but it is also true that we need to get on and build some more houses. I will draw the hon. Lady’s question to the attention of the Housing Minister, who is doing his very best in that regard. This issue is raised very often, so, should she wish to seek an Adjournment or Westminster Hall debate, I am sure other Members would want to come along and take part.
Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)
On Monday of this week the former MP for Clydebank and Milngavie, Tony Worthington, sadly passed away. He was the MP for my home town of Clydebank from 1987 until 2005. Over 18 years in this House, he championed many causes, not least the campaign to secure compensation for victims of asbestos-related illness and their families after the collapse of Chester Street Insurance Holdings. He was victorious in that fight. He will be remembered fondly by my constituents, and he remains an inspiration to me. Will the Leader of the House to join me in commemorating Tony Worthington and offering our condolences to his wife Angela, his son Robert, his daughter Jennifer and his three grandchildren?
Sir Alan Campbell
I certainly join my hon. Friend and all those in this House in remembering the life and achievements of Tony Worthington. I knew Tony briefly, and I was certainly aware of the extraordinary campaigning he undertook and his success, not least on asbestos. It is not every MP who at the end of their career can claim success in the way that Tony Worthington could. I share the House’s sympathy and send our condolences to Tony’s family at this time. We remember his life, which was a life well lived.
Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)
I wish you and the whole House a very happy St George’s day, Madam Deputy Speaker. Following the launch of the local media action plan, will the Leader of the House join me in celebrating local newspapers in my constituency such as the Bridlington Echo, the Bridlington Free Press, the Driffield & Wolds Weekly and the Holderness & Hornsea Gazette, and local radio stations including Bridlington Gold Radio, Great Driffield Radio and This is the Coast? Can we have a debate in Government time on the funding for local radio and for local newspapers, to ensure that that £12 million effectively reaches those brilliant independent outlets, so that they can innovate and attract high-quality journalism?
Sir Alan Campbell
The Government are certainly keen to see local newspapers and local radio continue, because they are so important to the lives of our communities. I will draw the hon. Gentleman’s remarks to the attention of the relevant Minister; if he wants to hear from the Minister directly about what more we can do with the fund, then he might seek an Adjournment debate.
Justin Madders (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough) (Lab)
When the Central England Co-operative announced that it was purchasing the Marquis pub in Great Sutton and the Saffron restaurant in Ellesmere Port, we were delighted that those old buildings were going to be brought back into use as convenience stores. However, five years on since those announcements, I am afraid that both buildings have been left to rot. That is not a good look for our community. We want the Co-op to get on and build the new stores that it has promised. It is vital for our community that we see that investment, to build on our £20 million of Pride in Place funding, but we are at a roadblock, and we cannot get an answer on where things need to go. Could we please have a debate on what other levers we can use to encourage this investment, which we absolutely want to see?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is right to raise these matters. They must be of deep concern to his constituents, who had their hopes built up but nothing has happened. I hope the Co-op has heard what he has said today, because the answer lies largely in its hands. He is right to point out that we are taking action to help high streets, not least through Pride in Place. Should he seek a meeting with Ministers to see if there are any other levers to pull, as he puts it, I will arrange that.
Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)
Some of the most shocking stories that I heard during the general election campaign on doorsteps throughout North Cornwall were of people pulling out their own teeth because they could not afford the high cost of private dental care. This week, all parties at Cornwall council unanimously passed a Lib Dem motion to tackle the urgent dentistry crisis we face by focusing on prevention, outreach services and workforce shortages. The Lib Dem sponsors, Councillors Rosie Moore and David Garrigan, emphasised urgent action over more talk. If Cornwall council can come together cross-party and act with such urgency, why can’t the Government? Will the Leader of the House please commit to a debate in Government time on fixing the NHS dentistry crisis in rural and coastal communities, like mine in Cornwall?
Sir Alan Campbell
The direct answer to the hon. Gentleman is that the Government are seeking to address these matters at pace. We are coming together to ensure, for example, that dental hubs are rolled out where people can see them and the effect can be felt. We have already rolled out 700,000 more urgent dental appointments. We are reforming the dental contract, which is perhaps easy to say and more difficult to do. We have also announced the first sustained expansion of dental training since 2007. Having said that, I hope that in the hon. Gentleman’s local area, by coming together, there is an opportunity to improve access to dentistry. It has been left in a shocking state, but the Government are fully committed to doing something about it.
Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)
Rural fly-tipping is a persistent problem across the villages in the South Bedfordshire part of my constituency, including Billington, Eaton Bray and Kensworth. I welcome the Government’s waste crime action plan and the additional £45 million for the environment agency to tackle fly-tippers and the criminal networks behind them. May we have a debate in Government time on the particular impact of fly-tipping in rural villages?
Sir Alan Campbell
Our new waste crime action plan sets out a zero-tolerance approach in order to prevent waste crime, pursue the criminals responsible and accelerate clean-up, and I think it has been widely welcomed. Should my hon. Friend seek an Adjournment debate on the scourge of fly-tipping in rural areas, I am sure it would be well attended. If she is not successful, I will certainly see if we can find time in Government time to give her the debate that she asks for.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
My casework team routinely wait between three and six months—sometimes longer—for substantive replies from the Department for Work and Pensions on cases. I am also aware of colleagues experiencing similar delays. Will the Leader of the House advise on the most effective means by which Members can hold the Government to account for these persistent failings?
Sir Alan Campbell
I understand the frustration that Members sometimes have when they do not receive full replies or the substantive replies that they seek. If the hon. Lady gives me details of that particular case, I will certainly follow them up. She may also know that the Procedure Committee is undertaking an inquiry into parliamentary questions. The situation is a bit more complicated than it seems, because the number of PQs has gone through the roof and there are all sorts of questions as to why that should be the case. Also, although Members are given the opportunity to ask questions and hold Departments to account, there is a question as to whether the rules that we work to and live by are the right ones for the current situation.
David Baines (St Helens North) (Lab)
Happy St George’s day, Madam Deputy Speaker. Alan Clark and a team of volunteers from the CAMRA award-winning pub Haydock Reading Rooms recently completed the West Highland Way, raising thousands of pounds for Clatterbridge hospital and for Ryan Lawrenson, who at just 21 was recently diagnosed with osteosarcoma. Will the Leader of the House join me in wishing Ryan and his family the very best? Does he also agree that Alan and the team’s voluntary work and community effort show the best of Haydock and the best of England?
Sir Alan Campbell
I want to reciprocate by wishing my hon. Friend a happy St George’s day. He highlights some of the incredible efforts by Alan Clark and other volunteers from his constituency. As I have said many times before, local volunteers are the golden thread that runs through our constituencies, so I will of course join him in wishing Ryan and his family well, and in thanking the team.
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)
Twenty-four-year-old Eastbournian Chanté Lloyd-Buckingham was tragically found dead in her supported accommodation in the town in 2024, amid grave concerns about the quality of the care that she was—or, indeed, was not—receiving. Scandalously, many private supported accommodation providers are not CQC regulated, so many of them take our money but do not take responsibility. Given that Chanté’s parents, Emma and Karl, secured 70,000 signatures on their e-petition to regulate supported accommodation but did not quite make the 100,000 for a debate, will the Leader of the House consider granting a debate on this issue to honour the memory of Chanté?
Sir Alan Campbell
I am saddened to hear of the tragic case and will certainly give the hon. Gentleman’s request some consideration. I suspect that a cross-departmental approach needs to be taken here, so if he wishes to give me further details, I will draw his concerns to the attention of Ministers; it is important that they see how these things actually play out in local constituencies and how they affect individuals.
Kirsteen Sullivan (Bathgate and Linlithgow) (Lab/Co-op)
The British Standards Institution has supported safety, industrial harmony and best practice in the workplace for 125 years this year. I have seen at first hand the extensive work that it has done in creating the new inclusive personal protective equipment standards, with special mention to Anne Hayes, Sara, Nele and Robbie. Will the Leader of the House support a debate in Government time on these vital standards and join me in wishing the BSI a very happy 125th birthday?
Sir Alan Campbell
I want to take this opportunity to congratulate the BSI on 125 years of tireless work. There was a Westminster Hall debate on this very matter recently. I encourage all workplaces and employers to align their work practices with the Government’s suicide prevention strategy, and to consider drawing on BSI standards to help embed suicide prevention in working practices.
Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)
I am proud today to celebrate Warwickshire day with colleagues from across this House, and I thank the Speaker’s Office for arranging an event this morning. It was a real honour to raise the Warwickshire flag on the flagpole here in Parliament.
The Believe in Bedworth board manages the £20 million Pride in Place investment from the Government, and we are holding a St George’s day celebration this Saturday. There will be free activities for children, as well as food vendors and stalls. It will be a great day out for everyone, and I am really looking forward to it. Can I ask the Leader of the House if the Government will make time for a debate on the importance of community events like this for cohesion in our areas and to celebrate days like St George’s day and Warwickshire day?
Sir Alan Campbell
I join my hon. Friend in recognising Warwickshire day. As I have said previously, community volunteers and events like the one she describes are at the heart of making our local communities the fantastic places they are. This sounds like a great way to celebrate St George’s day. Should she seek a Westminster Hall debate on the issues she raises, then I hope she is successful. If not, then I will give consideration to her request for a debate in Government time.
Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)
One of my constituents was diagnosed with breast cancer and subsequently received universal credit and incapacity benefit, but the DWP then stopped these payments due to some confusion over a critical illness cover policy. The facts around it were incorrect. Despite her best efforts and despite my team’s recent best efforts, we have been unable to get a hearing from a DWP caseworker for a mandatory reconsideration claim. That was over six months ago. In the meantime, she has now discovered that her cancer is terminal. Please can we have a debate in Government time on DWP delays and their impact on the critically ill?
Sir Alan Campbell
I am sorry to hear about the case that my hon. Friend raises. It must be a very difficult time for his constituent and her family. I am sure that I speak for the whole House when I extend my deepest sympathies and best wishes to her. If my hon. Friend would like to give me the details after Question Time, I will ensure that he gets a response from the relevant Minister.
Mary Glindon (Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend) (Lab)
Further to the concerns raised by the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers), will the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero make a statement on the delayed hydrogen strategy refresh? Projects in my constituency, including the Lhyfe Wallsend development, are ready to move forward but face growing uncertainty. Given the importance of hydrogen for jobs and energy security, and in supporting UK industry, will the Government provide clarity on when the strategy will be published and how it will support investment in the north-east and other regions?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is a true champion of businesses not just in her constituency and along the river that we share, but across our region. I pay tribute to her for that work, for which she is widely respected. As I have said, we are committed to building a thriving hydrogen sector in the UK, but we have not been able to move as quickly as possible. We want to renew the hydrogen strategy and see it at work, but we must also give industry the clarity it needs. I hope that work will be completed as soon as possible. Should she wish to make her case to a Minister, I will make the case for a meeting with her and the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers).
Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)
May I wish you a happy St George’s day, Madam Deputy Speaker?
Reform-run Lancashire county council, which borders my Bolton West constituency, has threatened residents with care home closures, put gritting depots on the chopping block and attempted to withhold money given by this Labour Government to support local nurseries. With vital local elections on Thursday 7 May, does the Leader of the House agree that my constituents will look askance at the chaos over the border in Reform-run Lancashire, listen to their neighbours and conclude that once voters have had a taste of Reform in power, they do not go back for seconds?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for raising the performance—or, should I say, the lack of performance —of Reform councils. We have heard time and again in business questions that when Reform is in local government, it over-promises and under-delivers. There is a real political choice in the coming local elections. He makes a strong case for learning from the example of what it is like to live under a Reform council, and for the benefits of voting Labour.
Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)
The 14 to 18-year-olds who study at university technical colleges are three or four times more likely than the national average to secure an apprenticeship. The UTC in Derby is oversubscribed—it got 450 applications for just 100 places —and demand outstrips the number of places in other UTCs too. Many of our industries are concerned about skills shortages, so might we have a debate on how to expand UTC provision, or enable UTCs to team up with other schools, so that more young people can benefit from the skills that UTCs teach and from those strong routes into apprenticeships?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend raises an important matter. We recently announced 19 new technical excellence colleges in England, on top of the 10 confirmed for the construction sector last year. We are expanding the youth guarantee to create further opportunities for young people. However, as she points out, we need to go further and we are committed to doing so. I encourage her to apply for a Westminster Hall debate to explore how we can expand the opportunity to study at university technical colleges. That is, as she points out, so important for our young people and local communities.
Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)
Friday 8 May is a significant day: the country will celebrate the 100th birthday of our national treasure, Sir David Attenborough. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] He is an icon of broadcasting, a steadfast champion of the natural world, and an educator who has brought science and all corners of our world into the homes of millions of people. His contribution to our national life is without equal. He remains the only individual to have received BAFTA awards across black and white, colour, high definition, 3D and 4K broadcasting, and one of the very few people to have been knighted twice. On the off-chance that these are the last business questions before Sir David’s birthday, will the Leader of the House join me in wishing him a very happy birthday, and will he support a debate in Government time on the immense contribution that Sir David has made to our nation and on the merits of establishing a permanent public monument to honour it?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that matter. As I said previously, Sir David Attenborough has been instrumental in teaching generations about the importance of the natural world. I am sure that the whole House will join me in celebrating the monumental occasion of Sir David’s 100th birthday, and let us give some thought across the House to how best we can mark that.
Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall) (Lab)
In South East Cornwall we are rightly very proud of Cornwall Air Ambulance, which, along with more than 20 air ambulance charities across the UK, carries out vital lifesaving work, responding to over 130 missions daily and attending some of the most serious incidents, from road traffic collisions to cardiac arrests and major trauma. Cornwall Air Ambulance has raised concerns with me about emergency planning, particularly around fuel resilience and rising costs. Will the Leader of the House support me in securing a meeting with the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that Cornwall Air Ambulance and other air ambulance charities are fully included in national emergency and prioritisation planning, so that they can continue to deliver critical care without disruption?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for raising the important work of the Cornwall Air Ambulance charity and wholeheartedly join her in commending the vital work of the volunteers who keep these essential services in the sky. I will certainly take up her concerns with my right hon. Friend the Health Secretary to seek the meeting that she wants, but because it may not simply be a matter for the Department of Health and Social Care, let us give some consideration to how else we can resolve this matter at a ministerial level.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
A very happy St George’s day to you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Erewash Voluntary Action underpins dozens of community groups in Erewash, providing governance, safeguarding and volunteer support. Councils for voluntary service like EVA need infrastructure investment to provide support to frontline groups and volunteers. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating EVA on securing more than £400,000 in funding from the National Lottery Community Fund and consider finding time for us to debate the importance of locally rooted voluntary sector infrastructure organisations like the fantastic Erewash Voluntary Action?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to champion the work of the brilliant community groups in his constituency, and I join him in congratulating Erewash Voluntary Action on securing its funding and continuing to support community engagement. There has been a theme this morning, and indeed in other sessions, about the importance of community volunteers, so I will certainly give some thought to his suggestion that we should find a way of discussing these matters further.
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
I recently walked around Ball Green with Sharon Rospendowski, a local champion who helps to keep the fabric of her community together. Residents in Ball Green and places like Norton share a common concern: they have lost vital services over the years, including Sure Start centres, youth clubs, post offices and local policing—services that kept our communities secure and connected. Despite that, it is people like Sharon who step forward to fight for their communities. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on restoring neighbourhood services and outline how this Government will ensure that places like Norton and Ball Green get the investment they deserve, so that they can rebuild?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise that matter. As I have said many times, these organisations are the golden thread that runs through our communities. Our social cohesion plan sets out our commitment to bring communities together and restore pride in them, and I encourage him to apply for an Adjournment debate so that he can make his case in more detail.
Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)
Happy Warwickshire day, and happy St George’s day, Madam Deputy Speaker. This week also marks an event that is incredibly important to me: Allergy Awareness Week. On Monday I was proud to launch the national allergy strategy with more than 150 clinicians, researchers, patients, families and charities. With more than 21 million people in the UK suffering from allergic diseases, does my right hon. Friend agree that time should be given in this House to debate allergy care, the strategy and how we can improve outcomes for those who suffer?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend and everyone who worked to develop the national allergy strategy. Over the coming months the Government will thoroughly review all of the strategy’s recommendations, and carefully consider the feasibility and viability of their implementation. I encourage my hon. Friend to apply for a Westminster Hall debate so that those matters can be discussed in more detail.
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
St George’s day is an appropriate time to ask my right hon. Friend about progress in the implementation of the veterans covenant across the public sector. Thanet has a significant number of veterans who, despite the commitment to the ambitions of the covenant by the Government, still struggle to access public services in a way that meets their needs. This is of course a cross-departmental matter, so I ask him to raise the issue with colleagues across Government to see if and when we could have a progress report.
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is right to raise veterans’ issues and I thank her for doing so. As she knows, Op Valour is our UK-wide veterans’ support system, providing £50 million in funding to better connect charities and local and national services. I will ensure that she gets a response from the Minister for Veterans and People and the update on the issues that she seeks.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
For over two years, residents on the edge of Carlisle, in Rockcliffe, Harker and Cargo, have been waging an excellent campaign against the building of a gasification plant—a campaign for which they have my full support. Cumberland council rightly refused the application, but the applicant, who has much deeper pockets than local residents, is taking the issue to appeal. My community is not the only one fighting incinerator plans, so will the Leader of the House arrange for a ministerial statement on the Government’s current position on the building of new incinerators?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this matter to the House. The Government have set up new rules so that waste incinerators will receive planning approval only if they meet strict new local environmental conditions. I know that this is a matter of concern not only to my hon. Friend’s constituents but to others, and I will draw it to the attention of Ministers.
Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)
My constituent Kevin has to travel between Redditch, Gloucester and Cheltenham for chemotherapy and operations following a diagnosis of oesophageal cancer. He has been told that he does not qualify for hospital transport as he is not in a wheelchair or using oxygen, but in reality Kevin is in no fit state to drive himself to appointments over an hour away from his home. Can I ask the Leader of the House for a debate in Government time to discuss how integrated care boards and the Department of Health and Social Care can work together to ensure that non-emergency patient transport services take a holistic approach to granting transport for deeply unwell patients to get them to their critical appointments?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend raises a serious matter. The Government recognise that the cost of travel should not be a barrier to treatment, and the non-emergency patient transport scheme guidance is determined by ICBs and their partners, including local ambulance trusts. I will make sure that the relevant Minister is aware of this case and see what action may be taken.
Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)
Type 1 diabetes with disordered eating, or T1DE for short, is a lethal combination of two conditions, but pilot sites set up to trial bespoke NHS services that bring specialists from both fields together have closed down due to funding coming to an end, including two earlier this month. The all-party parliamentary group on diabetes wrote to the DHSC about that in February but has not received a reply. Will the Leader of the House chase a response and ask the public health Minister to make a statement on the matter so that we can debate support for that vulnerable group of patients?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this incredibly important matter. NHS England previously extended the initial two-year funding term and is providing data to ICBs to support decisions about treatment and care, but I will of course reach out to the relevant Minister to ensure that those responses are issued as a matter of priority.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
May I ask the Leader of the House to welcome the new owners of Harlow Town football club to their role after a period of uncertainty, when the club went into administration. As I know he is a fan of football teams that play in red and white, will he join me in wishing Harlow Town football club, often known as the non-league Man City, a successful season next year?
Sir Alan Campbell
I certainly join my hon. Friend in welcoming the new owners of Harlow Town. I am sure that is welcome news to supporters, because local football clubs are of such importance to our local communities, and I wish them all the best for the new season. May I also wish my hon. Friend all the best for Sunday, when he will be running the London marathon, raising funds for a local hospice?
With the House’s indulgence, Madam Deputy Speaker, may I correct the record? In answer to the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Ben Maguire), I said that we have already rolled out 700,000 emergency dental appointments. What I should have said is that we have started rolling out 700,000 emergency dental appointments. The work began this month. I want to ensure that when I misspeak, I put the record right at the earliest opportunity.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I thank the Leader of the House for that.
UK Biobank Data
(1 day, 12 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Digital Government and Data (Ian Murray)
With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement about the use of UK Biobank data.
UK Biobank is a non-profit charity, independent of Government. The Biobank brings together data, kindly donated by its volunteer participants, that is shared with accredited researchers globally to make significant scientific discoveries that improve patient health. That includes discovering genes that affect the risk of heart disease or cancer, identifying new ways of predicting dementia, identifying early warning signs for cancers, understanding immunity to covid-19, and work towards earlier detection of Parkinson’s. It is one of the most successful and important studies of its type, and it continues to benefit patients in the UK and around the world. We are all grateful to those individuals who are part of this landmark study that is so important for all of our health.
On Monday 20 April, the UK Biobank charity informed the Government that it had identified that its data had been advertised for sale by several sellers on Alibaba’s e-commerce platforms in China. Biobank told us that three listings that appeared to sell UK Biobank participation data had been identified. At least one of the three datasets appeared to contain data from all 500,000 UK Biobank volunteers. Additional listings offered support for applying for legitimate access to UK Biobank data or analytical support for researchers who already have access to the data. I want to reassure the House up front, however, that Biobank has advised that this data did not contain participants’ names, addresses, contact details or telephone numbers. The Government have spoken to the vendor today and they do not believe that there were any purchases from the three listings before they were taken down.
Once the Government were made aware of the situation, we took immediate action to protect participants’ data. First, we worked with Biobank, the Chinese Government and the vendor to ensure that the three listings that UK Biobank informed us included participant data had been removed. I want to thank the Chinese Government for the speed and seriousness with which they worked with us to help remove the listings and the ongoing work to remove any further listings. Secondly, we ensured that the Biobank charity revoked access to the three research institutions identified as the source of the information. Thirdly, we have asked that the Biobank charity pauses further access to its data until it has put in place a technical solution to prevent data from its current platform from being downloaded in this way again. I can confirm to the House that this pause is now in place. UK Biobank has also referred itself to the Information Commissioner’s Office.
We are still working with Biobank to ascertain from it the specific detail of what has happened. We have asked it to investigate how this data ended up for sale online as a priority, but I wanted to ensure that the House was aware of the incident and the action that the Government are taking.
Officials have been in regular contact with UK Biobank since the Government were made aware of the issue on Monday. I personally spoke to the chief executive and chair last night, alongside the Minister of State for Science and the Minister for Health Innovation and Safety. We have received assurances that the charity will conduct a rapid board-level review of the safeguards in place for accessing its data.
As I mentioned, in the short term, Biobank will suspend downloads from its platform. That is until a new system is brought in to control analysis downloads to approved researchers and will significantly enhance data access controls and safeguards. We have advised the chair and chief executive of Biobank to write to all participants as soon as possible to ensure that they are aware of what has happened.
In summary, and to be clear to the House and to those people affected, the charity has assured us that the data did not contain anybody’s names, addresses or contact details. It includes only data of people who have explicitly opted in to be part of the Biobank. Those are people who have given their explicit consent that this data can be used, in the knowledge that it will be shared with researchers globally.
Participants have done a great service to the people of this country, and human health globally, through their participation. For example, valuable research is being carried out at McGill University in Canada into chronic pain, which afflicts millions of people here in the UK. We expect UK Biobank to remain one of the leading health research resources.
This has been an unacceptable abuse of the UK Biobank charity’s data, and an abuse of the trust that participants rightly expect when sharing their data for research purposes. The Government take the incident extremely seriously, which is why we have acted rapidly to support the UK Biobank charity in its response and why I wanted to update the House at the earliest opportunity.
The Government will soon be issuing new guidance on control of data from research studies. I take this opportunity once again to urge all businesses and charities to ensure that that their systems and data-sharing processes are as secure as possible. We wrote to businesses last week about the cyber-security tools available to them—for free—from the Government and the steps they should take to maximise security. Ensuring the safe use of UK data is a priority for the Government. I commend this statement to the House.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
I thank the Minister for his statement and for prior sight of it. This is indeed a serious breach. In another life, I was the chief operating officer of a tech company and we, too, had data breaches. We found that the best way to deal with them was to have developed a culture of openness and honesty in the organisation, not to flap or panic, to plug the leak and to limit the damage. Ideally that is all rehearsed, because it is too late to learn to swim when the ship starts sinking.
A couple of things in the Minister’s statement require clarification. The statement says what the data does not include, with the implication being that the participants could not be individually identified. What was in the data? Could it be used to identify participants, even if only mosaically?
The statement says that the research institutions identified as the source of the leak have had their access blocked. I am left thinking: is that it? Were those institutions Chinese? What sanctions are available either to the UK Biobank or to the Government on those institutions? Is their blocking permanent or temporary? How has UK Biobank reassured itself and its participants that no further copies of the data exist? What is the possibility or likelihood that the full dataset is now in the hands of the Chinese state?
I hope that the Minister will forgive me for not being an instant expert on UK Biobank. Can he tell me whether any research institutions that have access to UK Biobank data are based in Russia, Iran or North Korea? What is the Government’s risk assessment?
When I served on the Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill Committee, I distinctly remember the Government whipping their Back Benchers to vote down a Conservative amendment to oblige the Secretary of State to maintain a register of hostile actors posing a threat to the cyber-security of critical UK industries and sectors, including health. Will the Minister commit to reviewing that in the light of this serious data breach?
This is a grave incident. UK Biobank is an amazing project with thousands of trusting volunteers. I hope that the Government will send in the relevant agencies to help UK Biobank to secure its systems for the future, including vetting the research institutions that it trusts.
Ian Murray
I thank the shadow Minister for the way in which he has approached this matter—indeed, with his expertise as a former COO of a tech company. Let me answer his questions directly.
As we understand it—this is from UK Biobank, which is not a Government organisation, but an independent charity—UK Biobank cannot be entirely sure about the data that was included, because it was taken down from the Alibaba websites. However, we do know that there is no personal data in it, in terms of identifiers. I can give an indication of some of the characteristics that are potentially in UK Biobank datasets, which include gender; age; month and year of birth; assessment centre data; attendance date; socioeconomic status; lifestyle habits; measures from biological samples such as haematology and biochemistry—this is the kind of stuff that has been detected—online questionnaires data; sleep; diet; work environment; mental health, and health outcomes data.
The shadow Minister asked whether there are identifiers for individuals. There are not, but it would be wrong for me to give 100% assurance—and UK Biobank cannot do so—that someone could not be identified from the data. However, it would have to be used in a very advanced way in order to do that.
The hon. Gentleman asked about the three institutions. They have been immediately banned from the platform, and that will be permanent. The Biobank only works with accredited organisations, institutions and individual academic researchers, and the accreditation system is there to make sure that those using it are doing so for valid purposes. It has been running since 2012 and has been used for hundreds of thousands of different analyses. It works incredibly well and will continue to do so.
Let me explain how the system works and where the problem has arisen. In 2024, the system was changed from Biobank issuing datasets to accredited organisations and academic researchers to having all the information on the Biobank platform. When people access the data, they do their analysis and then download it. The system also allows people—although, contractually, accredited organisations are not supposed to do this—to download datasets. We understand from Biobank that what has probably happened is that the three institutions have downloaded the datasets themselves. As yet, we are unclear as to how those datasets ended up on the website, but UK Biobank, along with institutions and organisations attached to the Government, is working through that at the moment.
The hon. Gentleman asked for reassurance that Russia, Iran and North Korea are not accredited, and I understand from UK Biobank that they are not. He also mentioned hostile actors. UK Biobank is very strict about who has access, because there is an accreditation process. Secondly, although the three institutions are Chinese in this particular instance, the Chinese Government and Alibaba have been very proactive in helping us, through the British embassy in Beijing, to take down and whack-a-mole anything else that comes up, and they are currently going through that process. Yale University had its accreditation suspended for a breach of data, so this is not a country-specific issue. It just so happens that, in this particular case, the three institutions were Chinese. I think that answers the shadow Minister’s questions.
Emily Darlington (Milton Keynes Central) (Lab)
Health datasets of the size that UK Biobank has are incredibly important, because they allow us to find answers to the huge health challenges that many of us face, whether that is pain, as the Minister referred to, dementia or heart conditions. My concern is that this breach will make people think twice before donating their data. That could have a huge impact on our ability to treat conditions right across the world, but particularly here in the UK. The scientific community has always worked across borders and collaborated, whether that is with Europe, Canada, the US or even China. Given that it is only through these datasets that we can make medical breakthroughs, can the Minister reassure people who are thinking about participating that the protections that he, UK Biobank and other platforms of this kind are putting in place will absolutely protect people in the future?
Ian Murray
My hon. Friend makes an incredibly important point. I will say from the Dispatch Box that we should encourage more participation in UK Biobank. It is a global leader in research and is funded by the Wellcome Trust and the Medical Research Council. It also receives significant funding from Cancer Research UK, the British Heart Foundation and the National Institute for Health and Care Research. That shows the breadth of research that it does on all the key diseases that we suffer from in this country, and it is resolving some of these problems. Chinese researchers are making significant progress on diseases such as Alzheimer’s. Biobank is a global platform, and it is very much welcomed as a research resource. We should encourage the public to make sure that they can volunteer their data, so that the health of all of us is improved as a result.
Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)
I, too, thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement, and I join the Government in thanking the volunteers who have given researchers access to deeply personal medical records. A very close family member of mine has recently taken the decision to share medical data—although not with UK Biobank—in order to advance such research. It is not an easy decision, but this is such an important cause. Without the many people who have handed over their data, many of the transformational medical breakthroughs of recent years would not have been possible. That is precisely why what has happened is so serious.
This is not the first leak from UK Biobank. In March, The Guardian reported that sensitive medical data donated in good faith had been posted online without the consent of donors, and records have now been put up for sale on a Chinese e-commerce site. This is a profound betrayal of the people who trusted this institution with some of the most intimate details of their lives. UK Biobank has sought reassurances that no names, contact details, NHS numbers or phone numbers were leaked. That is reassuring, but the dismissal of privacy concerns shows a shocking lack of understanding of how easily individuals can be identified, especially in today’s world of artificial intelligence and social media. I urge the Government to hold UK Biobank accountable, and to ensure that protocols are followed and that confidential patient data is not shared online.
Although we are pleased to see a quick and full response from the UK Government in this instance, volunteers need more. Will the Secretary of State require UK Biobank to provide a full, step-by-step breakdown of how it will reform its data privacy once and for all? We need not just guidance or reassurance, but binding commitments that this will not happen again, and that includes some of the technical elements. We cannot just rely on people’s commitment not to download something; the technical barriers should be there. Will the Government ensure that any new guidance strikes the right balance between enabling vital research and guaranteeing watertight protections for patient data? Such data is vital for research, which is so important for the future.
Finally, has UK Biobank even offered an apology to its volunteers? We cannot find one, so we are calling on UK Biobank to issue a full apology without delay. People gave their data to save lives, and they at least deserve accountability.
Ian Murray
I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for the way in which she has dealt with this issue. I echo her thanks to all the volunteers—not only those who give their sensitive data to UK Biobank for critical purposes, but all the volunteers who give data for all research purposes.
The Liberal Democrat spokesperson used the word “leak”, but this was not a leak; it was a legitimate download by a legitimately accredited organisation. We have identified a problem with the UK data bank system, in the sense that accredited users have used the system to analyse data sources and then download their results from that analysis, but the system has not prevented them from also downloading the source data. It is that downloaded source data that is against the terms of use for accredited organisations. The three Chinese organisations have been found to have done that, which is why they have been suspended from the site. This was not a leak as such. How that data has got from those institutions on to the Alibaba website is still to be concluded, but this was not a leak of data or a cyber-attack. This was a legitimate download of legitimate data by a legitimately accredited organisation, which is why we should not use the word “leak” for the purposes of reassuring the volunteers who put their data into the system.
Let me answer the hon. Lady’s question about what has been done and what the Government have asked Biobank to do. I reiterate that the whole system has been paused, and the board has taken actions to write to all participants; in fact, there is a statement on Biobank’s website. I cannot recall whether the statement includes an apology, but we will take that back to Biobank—I am sure it is watching this statement. The Information Commissioner’s Office will also be involved, because this issue relates to data. Biobank has referred this incident to the ICO, and we will work very closely with it. I emphasise that we take this matter extremely seriously. We came to the House at the first available opportunity this morning, before the release from Biobank had gone out, to make sure that Members could reassure the volunteers and also see how seriously we take this issue.
The hon. Lady referred to an article in The Guardian. It is because journals demand source data before publication in order to reduce fraud that the source data was included in some journal articles that linked directly to the source data on UK Biobank. Again, it was not a leak; it is about the way in which researchers used data incorrectly.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
I am deeply concerned by today’s statement, not least because I am a former research scientist who is all too aware of the professional ramifications of research institutions breaching data control regulations. I know that the vast majority of researchers would never dream of abusing data in this way. Will the Minister provide a reassurance that researchers will not generally be prevented from accessing and using such data appropriately in the future?
Ian Murray
UK Biobank has assured us over the past 24 hours that it is looking for a technical fix, which should happen relatively shortly, and we will hold it to that. To show that we are taking the situation as seriously as it should be taken, we have insisted as a Government that UK Biobank should pause all access to, downloads from and use of the system until the fix comes into place. I do not know the exact figures of usage, but across the globe there are somewhere in the region of more than 16,000 researchers using this resource, because it is so valuable. We should thank them for doing that and ensure that they have full access to UK Biobank in the safe way in which it should be used as soon as possible.
Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)
This scandal is essentially a China data theft of UK Biobank’s data, which is generously donated by some half a million British citizens. Let us remember that the UK taxpayer funded approximately £200 million for setting up UK Biobank. They fund about £15 million every single year, which is used by some 22,000 researchers, including 2,000 or 3,000 in China, I understand. Will the Minister confirm that our generosity will not be abused by Chinese researchers and that UK Biobank should exclude them in the future in order to ensure that this data theft comes with sanctions?
Ian Murray
I do not think the tone of the hon. Gentleman’s question fits the seriousness of this issue. We are yet to get a conclusion from UK Biobank on what the process looked like for the three institutions that have been identified as downloading some datasets to transfer them to the seller, and we will update Members when we are clear on that. UK Biobank has told us quite clearly that that is what has happened.
There are thousands of Chinese researchers working every day on data from UK Biobank and other datasets from across the world, and they have been doing that since 2012 safely and securely. The issue here is that a loophole in the system has allowed datasets to be downloaded alongside the analytical research. If the hon. Gentleman saw some of the advances being made, particularly on Alzheimer’s, he would know that we are working very closely with the research community across the world, from all countries.
As I said to the shadow Minister, the previous suspension of accreditation was for Yale in the United States for misuse of data. Participants know that this research is used globally, and it is right that it is used globally for the advancement of us all. Banning researchers from the site would not be the way in which to advance the outcomes of UK Biobank.
Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for his statement. Fundamentally, this is valuable data, and it relies on trust. I therefore welcome UK Biobank’s actions in suspending the agreement with these researchers. Will the Minister provide a commitment and welcome the technical solution for protecting this data? More and more, we are seeing papers published by AI bots, so there needs to be a way to trace back to the evidence used. There needs to be a workaround on the technical support in order to advance medical research. Will the Minister comment on that?
Ian Murray
Significant undertakings were given by the chair and board of UK Biobank this week. They have answered all the questions and worked very closely with the Government, the British embassy in Beijing and the Chinese Government to ensure that this instance is resolved as quickly as possible. They have immediately identified the loopholes that enabled the download of the data from the institution, and they are carrying out mitigation work to ensure that that cannot happen again and to tighten up the system. That should happen within weeks, but in the meantime the UK Government insisted that all access to and downloads from it be paused, and the entire system was paused to allow that work to happen. I pay tribute to UK Biobank for the swiftness with which it has done that. To echo the words of the shadow Minister, it has dealt with the issue transparently, and we welcome that—that is what is required in these kinds of circumstances.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister very much for his statement. As my party’s health spokesperson, I know that research on health is so important initially. UK Biobank is a critical part of that in finding the methods and drugs for cures. The disclosure of data is always a worrying issue, so will the Minister confirm that the breakdown and the data breach do not reach as far as Northern Ireland? For example, Queen’s University Belfast and Ulster University are deeply involved in all sections of health research. Has their research been compromised in any way? We always ask for close co-operation with our universities as an integral part of the United Kingdom, and it is essential that opportunity and protection be afforded throughout the whole United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Ian Murray
I pay tribute to the Belfast universities and the way in which they have advanced research. As has already been mentioned, tens of thousands of individual accredited researchers use UK Biobank regularly, as do thousands of institutions across the globe. We need to ensure that the system is safe, so that volunteers participating in the system can be assured that their data is safe and secured, and that is why it has been paused.
The hon. Gentleman challenges me on whether Belfast universities have been affected by this issue. They will be affected by it in the short term, because there is currently no access to the system, but we hope that that will be resolved. I understand from UK Biobank and from officials that they have been in talks with the pharmaceutical industry and researchers in the field to see whether that would cause a problem, and as long as this situation is temporary, it should not. They will technically be affected in the short term until access is fully recovered.
Dr Allison Gardner (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Lab)
From my previous work with the AI and Digital Regulations Service, and as a scientist, I know that UK Biobank is an excellent resource, which furthers scientific research for the benefit of my health and my constituents. In particular, it is working very hard to ensure that its dataset is unbiased and representative of all peoples in our communities in our country. Will the Minister again reassure us that the data is scrupulously anonymised and that deanonymisation is exceptionally difficult and unlikely? Will he confirm that although UK Biobank is a charity and independent of Government, we will continue to support its work once it has addressed the processes that caused this breach?
Ian Murray
Yes, I can give that assurance. This Government are giving UK Biobank all the support that it requires to resolve the immediate issue and in the short term to get the system back up and running in as secure a way as possible. Let me echo that participants in UK Biobank have done a great service to the people of this country and around the world. We owe it to them to be transparent and secure, and to ensure that their data is not only safe but advancing UK and worldwide medical research for the benefit of everyone.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I will not mention Harlow Town, I promise. [Laughter.]
May I thank the Minister for his statement? I agree with others that UK Biobank is an excellent resource, and I have no doubt that its research has made a huge difference to the health of my constituents. Although this issue is not specifically a cyber-security breach, as he correctly said, will he join me in welcoming the Government’s Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill? Along with the hon. and gallant Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp), I had the pleasure of serving on the Bill Committee. Will the Minister add to the work that this Government are doing to ensure that our data across all industries, including the charity sector and Government, is safe under this Government?
Ian Murray
In a previous question, my hon. Friend said that Harlow Town were the Man City of non-league football. May I simply suggest that he is the Man City of speaking in this Chamber in terms of the quality and regularity of his contributions? That may be challenged by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon)—let us look at the data.
I echo what my hon. Friend said in his question, because it is really important for us to impress on the public that data is secure and safe. This Government take that incredibly seriously, not just in the legislation being passed, which he has been a part of, but in the cyber-security tools available for free from this Government to businesses, organisations and institutions right across the country. We wrote to those organisations last week to inform them that those tools were available, and I continue to echo to all businesses, institutions and organisations that they should get involved in ensuring that they are as cyber-secure as possible. We are only as secure as the weakest, and we all have to be as secure as we possibly can be.
Synthetic Chemicals
Housing Conditions in Temporary Accommodation
Backbench Business
Allied Health Professionals
(1 day, 12 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call Jen Craft, who will speak for up to 15 minutes.
Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That his House has considered the contribution of allied health professionals.
I am very grateful to be able to introduce this debate today, and I would like to begin by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) on her hard work in securing it.
Allied health professionals, such as occupational therapists, physiotherapists, dieticians, music therapists and so many more, are a vital part of our NHS. They will be crucial to delivering the three shifts in healthcare—in particular, treatment to prevention and hospital to community—that the Secretary of State set out as key to delivering the 10-year health plan and securing the future of the NHS for generations to come. They help people to recover from illness or injury, prevent the onset and development of conditions such as frailty, help people to adjust to new or existing realities of disability, and are vital in enabling and empowering people to take control of their health.
My hon. Friend the Member for Dudley brings considerable professional experience to this place as a trained physiotherapist. I believe she plans to speak to the importance of those professionals to adult healthcare—indeed, she is best placed to do so—so I will focus primarily on the vital role of allied health professionals in paediatric care.
As a parent with experience of paediatric allied health professionals, I can speak to their completely invaluable contribution to a child’s wellbeing. They not only support the child who is the patient in their care, but the entire family. It can be a real lifeline to have a trusted professional helping you to come to terms with your child’s diagnosis, or perhaps with a shift in reality. I also know, from friends and constituents who have children living with life-limiting conditions, that allied health professionals such as music therapists and drama therapists can be the lifeline that provides moments of joy, as well as extending the lifespan and the time that people get to spend with their children who have very severe and limiting conditions.
I want to put on record that paediatric allied health professionals in particular are not just a “nice to have” or an add-on to the health profession. It is quite easy to overlook the contribution and impact that people such as music therapists—I will give an excellent example—can have on a child’s life. If Members can imagine a child who is non-verbal and potentially has behavioural and communication difficulties and no real form of self-expression, an art therapist, a music therapist or a drama therapist can help to unlock something that traditional healthcare workers perhaps cannot. They can make a real difference to how that child’s care progresses and how their life chances pan out.
Paediatric allied health professionals are also able to reduce the pressure and the intensity on the acute system. Excellent work has been done with music therapists, art therapists and play therapists, who do not currently come under the auspices of allied health professionals but perhaps one day may do, to reduce sometimes even the need for general anaesthetic, MRI scans or CT scans for particular children with complex needs, as they help them to navigate their pathway through the system.
They are also crucial in helping children who perhaps have had a traumatic early start to life to engage with the healthcare system and the wider healthcare system at large. Children who are recovering from, or going through treatment for, cancer or other severe diseases and illnesses, are supported by these professionals to come to terms and to grips with what they are going through and to express themselves. Professions such as occupational therapists, physiotherapists, and speech and language therapists play a vital role in childhood, enabling children who have an additional need in those areas to be able to perform at the same level as their peers and to be the best version of themselves.
The Health and Social Care Committee, of which I am a member, has taken considerable evidence on the crisis in the allied healthcare professions, in particular in paediatrics and early years. We have discussed at length with various organisations such as the Royal College of Occupational Therapists, the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists, Speech and Language UK, the Disabled Children’s Partnership and Contact the impact this is having on children, on families and on the professionals themselves.
There are currently 77,500 children who have been on community waiting lists—quite often the way that people access allied health professional care—for over a year.
Paulette Hamilton (Birmingham Erdington) (Lab)
My hon. Friend is making some fantastic points, especially those highlighting the findings of the Health and Social Care Committee. Allied health professionals are absolutely vital to what we do in the health service. As with health visitors, their numbers seem to be going down at the moment, and nothing is really being done to build them back up. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need to build the numbers of allied health professionals back up?
Jen Craft
I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. She brings a breadth of experience to this place on these issues, both as a member of the Health and Social Care Committee and as a registered nurse. I agree that we do need to take urgent action to rebuild the numbers of allied health professionals and health visitors. The Committee has heard that there has been a halving of the number of health visitors in the past 10 years, which has had an almost catastrophic impact on their ability to deliver the vital role that they play in identifying early need in childhood, particularly in the early years, supporting families where there is an additional need for support and signposting people to other mechanisms, such as Best Start family hubs, to ensure there is that proportionate universalism that is so key to ensuring that those who need help get it in a timely way. I very much agree with my hon. Friend that urgent action needs to be taken to address this, which we will hopefully see in the upcoming NHS workforce plan.
That ties into my earlier point. There are 77,500 children and young people who have been on a community care waiting list for more than a year in England, which is a sixfold rise since the start of 2023. For comparison, only around 1% of adults wait for more than a year for community care, compared with around 25% of children. Thinking about equity in healthcare, a year for a child could be an entire lifetime, which is not the case for an adult.
We also know that there is a really rapid development window in the early years, particularly in the first 1,001 days, where we have the ability to make an impact on the life chances of a child, when all that quick-fire development is happening mentally, physically, socially and emotionally. It is absolutely crucial to get in at the onset and arrest conditions before they become more serious and make a real impact on the life chances of a child through to schooling, employment and beyond.
However, there is a crisis across the allied health professions, particularly in early years. I want to highlight a few areas where this is really bearing fruit. According to the Royal College of Occupational Therapists, four fifths of occupational therapists are unable to meet local demand. The workforce remains focused on secondary care, which limits capacity for prevention and early intervention in communities. Workforce pressure does translate into rising waiting lists; in February 2026, nearly 18,000 children and young people were waiting to see an occupational therapist. This has a huge impact on the life of a young person. Quite often occupational therapist interventions are not costly, but the inference and reference of an expert or specialist is needed to be able to direct people in how best to carry them out. The fact that 18,000 children are waiting to see an OT is really shocking. These delays will have a real impact on professionals being able to act at the very earliest opportunity to turn children’s life chances around.
Speech and language therapy is another area that is experiencing a crisis in both recruitment and retention. According to Speech and Language UK, more than 2 million children in the UK have struggled to speak or understand words and an estimated 1.3 million have a developmental language disorder. The Government must train and recruit enough speech and language therapists to ensure that the trend of a reduction in the profession is arrested. Currently, 16% of NHS speech and language therapy posts in England are vacant, and the vacancy rate for NHS speech and language therapy posts supporting people with a learning disability is even more stark, at 25%. The Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists reports that 96% of children’s speech and language therapy services say that recruitment is more or much more challenging than at any time in the past three years.
What that translates to is those in these crucial professions spending the vast majority of their time carrying out assessment work when things have reached a point of crisis or acute care need. They are not getting to see people and intervene at the earliest opportunity, and they are not getting to help families. That is driving the retention crisis, as professionals find themselves unable to perform the role for which they trained and about which they are, by and large, incredibly passionate. Instead, they are spending their time carrying out assessments and recommending therapeutic care that they know is very unlikely to materialise.
The real crisis in the paediatric allied healthcare professions could have a huge knock-on effect on a major part of Government policy found in the education White Paper. I know that the Minister is here to speak for the Department of Health and Social Care, but the Health and Social Care Committee has continually found that there is a real gap in the role of healthcare when it comes to education, health and care plans, and in the special educational needs and disabilities system as a whole.
The White Paper places huge demand on having “experts at hand”—a locally trained workforce who are able to provide specialist support. It names professions such as occupational therapy, physiotherapy and speech and language therapy, which fall entirely within the allied health professional workforce, which it is in the gift of the Department of Health and Social Care to provide. However, we know that these occupations are at crisis point; time and again, when we talk to our local integrated care boards, they say that they do not have the people available to fulfil that “expert at hand” role. It is such an important part of the education White Paper that if it fails, I am afraid the entire White Paper is at risk of failure. The crux of it is early and timely intervention, and support for families, school staff and children, in order to make an impact at the earliest possible opportunity. Without this workforce, it cannot and will not succeed.
I ask the Minister: what plans will there be in the upcoming workforce strategy to address the decline in paediatric allied healthcare professionals? What plans are there for training, recruitment and retention, not just to support this important part of the education White Paper, but to address the real health inequality in paediatrics? It is fair to say that the impact on children is so much worse than that on adults receiving healthcare, because they can spend such a significant chunk of their life on a waiting list.
Most importantly, what action is being taken to ensure that these professionals, particularly those in the paediatric workforce, feel valued and know that their contribution really counts towards the delivery of both the current healthcare system and the Government’s wider reform agenda? How can we ensure that the life chances of children are best improved and encouraged through the recruitment, retention and valuing of allied healthcare professionals?
Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)
I start by paying tribute to the allied health professionals in my constituency and across the country, who work so hard to help people to regain and maintain their health. Indeed, I count many among my friends. From paramedics to physiotherapists, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists and so many others, I am always amazed at the skill and dedication of these professionals, who often work under intense pressure.
My constituent Jackie Lees-Howes is one of 174 registered physiotherapists living in my constituency. She highlighted several statistics that should give us pause for thought. Two thirds of the population will likely be living with a long-term health condition by 2035. Community waiting times continue to grow and, to make matters worse, the UK has far fewer physiotherapists per head than comparable countries. However, we know that physiotherapy is highly cost-effective, generating an overall return of around £4 for every £1 invested. It can prevent illness and help people recover more quickly, which reduces the strain on health services. Crucially, physios enable people to stay in and return to work. They help people to reduce pain, obesity and inactivity, contributing to a healthier and more productive population. Expanding the physiotherapy workforce alone could save the NHS hundreds of millions of pounds over the next five years.
However, as we have heard, many physios are struggling even to find a job due to recruitment freezes and a lack of entry-level positions, as well as problems with job security. Worryingly, the Government confirmed last year that they had made no estimate of the impact of recruitment freezes on physiotherapists and physiotherapist support workers.
Twenty-three per cent of my South West Devon constituents have at least one long-term condition. Over 18,000 are classed as disabled, slightly higher than the average across England. Relatively speaking, it is an ageing constituency, with 45% of constituents over the age of 50. That makes the role of physios and other allied health professionals in enabling people to prepare for and rehabilitate from things like cancer treatment and surgery even more vital.
I commend the Rehab Legends campaign led by Kate Tantam, an inspirational constituent of mine who works as an intensive care sister at Derriford hospital. Kate has spent years campaigning to ensure that every patient in the UK can access rehabilitation services towards the end of their stay in intensive care, which would end the current patchy provision. People might ask what Rehab Legends is. It is effectively a multidisciplinary team that helps rehabilitate men and women who have been on life support, because they often see deconditioning in the rest of their body. With rehabilitation, they stand a much better chance of moving on from intensive care.
Why is this important? At the moment, the step down from ICU to a normal ward is huge, and if people do not have the physical ability to take that step, their ultimate rehabilitation and ability to get back out into life will be significantly affected. That point has been raised time and again—it came up during the last Parliament in the work done by the all-party parliamentary group on intensive care, which my predecessor, Sir Gary Streeter, chaired—and it needs to be addressed. While that is not entirely about allied health professionals, I am sure the Minister will be aware of it, and it would be interesting to hear what might be done. Ultimately, the role of rehabilitation is good for patients and for society, because we want to enable everyone who has survived intensive care to leave intensive care and leave hospital.
We have heard plenty about occupational therapists and speech and language therapists. The Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists and others have highlighted that the NHS long-term workforce plan is likely to cover only speech and language therapists in the NHS workforce, which overlooks shortages in education and criminal justice settings. As we have heard, there is a real need for a holistic approach to developing the workforce, in recognition of the vital role played by speech and language therapists and others in supporting, in particular, children with special educational needs. Without capacity in the NHS for speech and language therapists, we will not be able to deliver on improving outcomes for some of the most vulnerable in our community, which I am sure we would all want to see.
Finally, I want to mention the work of allied health professionals who assess people for health-related benefits. We know from Department for Work and Pensions data published in January—rather late—that over half of assessors leave in their first year. Assessors describe stressful time constraints and impossible workloads as some of their reasons for leaving.
Under the current Government, one in 10 people in England and Wales is now claiming disability benefits, and the number is only set to increase. I urge the Minister to ensure that all allied health professionals are empowered to assess their patients without undue haste. I worry that otherwise this overstretched system may be incentivising assessors to recommend that a person receives disability benefits without having the appropriate time to thoroughly investigate their needs. Of course, that is in no way a reflection of these professionals themselves, as they are simply doing the job they are there to do with limited time and resources.
Let me finish with three brief requests. First, I urge the Minister to capitalise on the record number of newly qualified physiotherapists. Will she confirm what steps the Department is taking to ensure that newly qualified physiotherapists can be guaranteed an NHS job? Secondly, I urge her to commit to retaining the chief allied health professions officer role to ensure that their clinical expertise is recognised in the Department. Thirdly, a plug for rehabilitation: I would love the Minister to ensure that the role of intensive care rehabilitation is reflected in the NHS workforce plan, and a holistic approach is central to that.
I echo the concerns raised by the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy, which has criticised the Government’s requirement for integrated care boards to reduce their budgets by 50% and the impact that will have on allied health professional leadership roles. Under the previous Conservative Government, NHS England set out to increase our much-needed AHP workforce, as outlined in the 2023 NHS long-term workforce plan. This included an ambition to increase training places by 25% by 2031-32.
We know how critical allied health professions are to prevention and recovery. The Government must ensure that they prioritise them in the revised NHS workforce plan, which is due to be published this spring. The allied health professions are ideally placed to help people help themselves. If we want a healthier country and a more productive society, we must back them all the way.
Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)
Happy St George’s day to everyone in the Chamber. As a physiotherapist, I am immensely grateful to have the opportunity to co-lead this debate on the contribution of allied health professionals. This is an historic moment, as it is the first ever debate in this House on AHPs.
I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting the debate, and I am particularly grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for her leadership and partnership. She set out powerfully why AHPs must be central to SEND and paediatric reform, and I want to broaden that by arguing that AHPs are the NHS’s best-kept secret. They are the most powerful levers we have to keep our health and social care systems sustainable, patient-centred and effective. If we are serious about delivering the Government’s ambition in the 10-year health plan and the 10-year workforce plan—the shifts from hospital to community, from sickness to prevention and from analogue to digital—then allied health professionals must be put at the heart of policy, planning and delivery.
I want to do three things today. First, I want to set out who AHPs are and the scale of their contribution across our lives; secondly, I want to demonstrate with evidence the impact they have on outcomes and on public finances, and why they are worth investing in; and thirdly, I want to set out five concrete demands, recommendations or wishes to the Government, rooted in evidence from AHP bodies and aligned with the three major shifts in the Government’s agenda.
Who are allied health professionals? There are 14 allied health professions covering 15 roles, and together, AHPs form the third largest clinical workforce in the NHS, with over 300,000 on the Health and Care Professions Council register today. They include art therapists, drama therapists, music therapists, dietitians, occupational therapists, operating department practitioners, orthoptists, osteopaths, paramedics, physiotherapists, podiatrists, prosthetists and orthotists, radiographers and, finally, speech and language therapists—which I may need after this speech!
AHPs are present from the start of our lives. Neonatal therapists, including physiotherapists, OTs and speech and language therapists, support premature and sick babies to feed, move and develop, with long-term gains for their health, learning and independence. In adulthood, AHPs are central to keeping us in work and out of hospital. The Government rightly want to get more people back into work, which is exactly what OTs do. OTs run vocational rehab services that enabled 94% of people on long-term sick in one primary care network in Wakefield to return to work, leading to a 40% reduction in fit notes and preventing over 1,700 people from leaving the workforce.
If we want a healthier workforce, dietitians help diabetics to reduce the risk of complications by up to 50%, and people who see a dietitian are two and a half times more likely to achieve their blood sugar targets, which means fewer long-term complications, fewer heart attacks and fewer strokes.
For older people, physiotherapists and OTs lead fall-prevention services and frailty programmes that reduce falls at home by around a third, preventing injuries and avoidable hospital admissions, reducing fractures and maintaining patients’ dignity. I have treated patients who have fallen in their home, who have lain on the floor for hours waiting for an ambulance to arrive. One patient said she lost her dignity and her self-worth as she sat in her own urine, dehydrated, hungry and helpless on the floor, waiting for help. We can reduce such cases. Nobody wants their grandmother, relative or friend to be left on the floor, helpless, for hours.
Earlier access to community podiatry, meanwhile, could reduce amputations by 80%. My podiatry friends prevent the need for life-changing surgery every single day. I have worked on surgical wards where patients said time and time again that they wished they had had intervention earlier. Prosthetists and orthotists ensure that people who have survived major trauma can regain their independence. A seven-day prosthetic service in south-east London reduced the time for lower-limb amputees to become independent with a prosthesis from three months to just seven weeks—so they gained their independence more quickly. Radiographers underpin around 80% of hospital pathways through imaging, and community diagnostic centres staffed by radiographers reduce pressure on urgent and emergency care; I may say that I recently gained one such centre, through this Labour Government, at the Guest hospital.
We have a mental health crisis, and both children and adults are not getting care quickly enough. Art therapists and music and drama therapists provide early intervention in schools and communities, reducing referrals into overwhelmed child and adolescent mental health services and supporting the wellbeing and resilience of NHS staff themselves.
My argument is not just about the care case, however; the economic case is just as compelling. We have clear return on investment data across multiple professions. Self-referral to AHP services has shown a return of around £98 for every £1 invested, by reducing unnecessary GP appointments and enabling early management. Exercise-based self-management programmes, often led by physiotherapists, have demonstrated returns of around £8.80 per £1 invested.
Nutritional interventions led by dietitians to prevent and treat malnutrition deliver returns of about £10 for every £1 invested. Osteopathic care can generate a return of up to £2 per £1 invested in primary care. Physiotherapists across a range of conditions deliver an overall economic return on investment of £4 for every £1 invested, which, modelling suggests, potentially saves the NHS a staggering £700 million over five years and an additional £639 million overall of economic benefit to the UK.
The Government have set out three core shifts, and AHPs are already delivering on all three. First, on digital and data, paramedics are leading “hear and treat” models, using teleconsultations and shared electronic records to assess, advise and refer 999 and 111 callers without always needing to dispatch an ambulance. In London, that approach is saving around 9,200 double-crewed ambulance hours each week, allowing crews to reach the sickest patients faster.
Secondly, on the shift from hospital to neighbourhood care, advanced paramedics working in primary care and urgent community response teams carry out same-day home visits, treat people where they are and prevent unnecessary trips to A&E. A Welsh model reduced avoidable hospital visits by up to 70%. Operating department practitioners are the only profession trained at graduation to work across anaesthetics, surgery and recovery. They can tackle the elective backlog and maintain safety, especially as robotic-assisted surgery and smart operating theatres expand.
Thirdly, on the shift to prevention over sickness, orthoptists are essential to diagnosing early eye conditions and they should be rolled out to screen our children in every school so they can get the best start to life. If we do not fully integrate AHPs into those three shifts, we will simply not achieve the ambitions of the 10-year health plan or the 10-year workforce plan.
Let me turn to my five recommendations, drawing on the evidence from the HCPC, from the expert AHP professional bodies, from patients and from the APPG on AHPs, which I chair. First, we must have AHP leadership at the table at every level. That means retaining and strengthening the chief allied health professions officer role and the director of rehabilitation role in the Department of Health and Social Care. If they are not at the heart of Government, they will simply be forgotten. At system level, every integrated care board and major provider should have a senior AHP director who has parity with medical and nursing directors and is responsible for prevention, rehabilitation and neighbourhood care. That should be mirrored in primary care and neighbourhood boards, where clinical leadership roles should be defined by function and capability, not by base profession.
Secondly, we should expand and evaluate advanced and extended-scope AHP roles in the areas where there is most need and they have most value, such as first-contact physiotherapists in primary care, who reduce secondary care referrals, speed up diagnosis and recovery, and reduce opioid prescribing compared with GP-led care.
Thirdly, we must invest in AHP careers from start to retirement. That means increasing training places in line with population need for each of the 14 professions, while also protecting small and vulnerable professions such as prosthetics and orthotics with minimum training place guarantees. We should fully fund AHP apprenticeships, including for operating department practitioners and dietitians, with backfill. We should guarantee high-quality placements and structured preceptorships—something often forgotten by departments.
We should also embed continuing professional development funding that is embedded into workforce planning, recognising that CPD is a regulatory requirement and a patient safety issue, not a luxury. That includes bringing forward independent prescribing rights across AHP professions, where appropriate, to reduce delays and free up medical time, building on recent legislation for paramedics.
Fourthly, we must fix the digital plumbing to enable multidisciplinary care. AHPs need full, appropriate access to shared care records, ordering and results systems, and remote care tools. Where they have prescribing responsibilities, their digital profiles must reflect that in order for prescribing to be safe, visible and integrated with the whole system. Data must also capture what AHPs do and the outcomes they achieve in function, independence, return to work, quality of life and participation; it is not just contacts and processes.
Fifthly, we should make AHP outcomes visible and use them to drive improvements across the system. At national level, the NHS and DHSC should publish regular data on AHP workforce numbers, vacancies and outcomes across each of the 14 professions, using HCPC and other data to inform the workforce plan and the neighbourhood health framework. At local level, integrated care systems should be required to report on access to AHP services and on key indicators such as falls, amputations, delayed discharge, return to work rates and SEND outcomes, linking those to AHP provision. Where investment in, for example, community podiatry or OT rehabilitation leads to reductions in admissions or benefits, those should be visible and reinvested.
Five demands—five things that would show real progress, backed by experts, backed by patients. I hope the Minister will meet me to discuss them further. If we give AHPs the leadership roles, tools and recognition they deserve, if we embed them in the 10-year workforce plan, in neighbourhood health plans, in SEND reforms and in the women’s health strategy, they will repay us over and over again in reduced hospital admissions, shorter stays, fewer amputations, more people in work, and children and adults able to communicate, learn and live independently. Allied health professionals are ready to deliver, if we choose to let them.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) on securing this important debate and the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for introducing it.
During the Easter recess, I was invited to meet the Dorset Younger Onset Parkinson’s group in Wimborne. Two of the people I met, Simon and Julia, had been diagnosed with the condition in their 30s. The impact on their decisions about family life, their ability to work and save for the future and the effect on their families, who have had to take on caring responsibilities much earlier than most, was clear to see. They told me about the success of their open water swimming group and, in particular, about the impact of the recently introduced walking football team. The Dorset Parky Striders were named team of the year in the impairment section by the Walking Football Association in its grassroots awards last year, and achieved fantastic results at the Sport Parkinson’s walking football tournament earlier this month. Both programmes boost physical health and mental wellbeing and provide peer support.
Simon and Julia shared their concerns about the complete loss of Parkinson’s nurses in the county of Dorset. I have since engaged with University Hospitals Dorset NHS foundation trust to call for the service to be restored without delay, and we have discussed the severe shortage of neurologists across the country, made more acute by our ageing population.
Yet it is not just doctors and nurses who can make a positive difference for people living with Parkinson’s. Neuro physiotherapy focuses not on muscles or joints, but on improving movement, balance, co-ordination and overall quality of life for people living with neurological conditions. At its core, it aims to restore as much independence as possible, using targeted techniques to help people regain their function, relearn movement and adapt to physical challenges. It can be life-changing for individuals recovering from trauma or surgery, as well as for those living with long-term neurological conditions. If people with Parkinson’s can improve their balance and gait, they reduce their risk of falls—incidents that can have a profound impact on their independence, confidence and long-term health. This branch of physiotherapy also benefits people who have experienced strokes, live with multiple sclerosis or have acquired brain injuries. The mental health and wellbeing benefits are significant, as is the reduction in pain that can be achieved through that approach.
I highlight the crucial role of occupational therapy, particularly in educational settings. Around one third of children starting school are not considered to be school-ready, often lacking the communication or functional skills needed to mix confidently with other children. Schools already under pressure are then required to provide significant extra support. Many children who spend more time using tablets than colouring books lack the fine motor skills needed to write, while others struggle with everyday activities such as eating a school meal with a knife and fork. Paediatric occupational therapy offers practical, play-based support and can prevent children from losing confidence or developing a fear or aversion of school by addressing those needs early. Children with special educational needs and disabilities can also be overwhelmed in traditional classroom environments. With growing evidence about the impact of excessive screen time on attention and regulation, small changes to the physical environment can help not only those children but all pupils to improve their focus and learning.
My constituent Anna, who is an occupational therapist, shared the importance of using the profession’s principles in classrooms. On a visit to Colehill first school last year, I was impressed by how the school had removed bright colours from classrooms, replacing them with muted shades and consistent layouts as the children move through the school to create calmer learning spaces. At my son’s specialist setting—Summerwood in Bournemouth—ceilings include sound-absorbing panels and walls are gently curved to support children with neurodiversity to regulate and to reduce distraction. Those adjustments help everyone, not just those with additional needs.
If such approaches work in classrooms, it is likely that they can be effective in workplaces and public spaces too. Reducing harsh fluorescent lighting, lowering background noise and creating opportunities for movement throughout the day are techniques that can be applied widely and successfully. However, inclusion of occupational therapy in programmes such as Experts at Hand is essential to make that happen. The Royal College of Occupational Therapists has welcomed the ambition set out in the SEND White Paper, but has raised serious concerns about whether the sector is sufficiently resourced to develop them. Its most recent workforce survey found that two thirds of respondents did not believe that the profession could currently provide the level of support that children and young people need, highlighting the need to fund more frontline teams.
Taken together, the examples make one thing clear: allied health professionals, as already referenced by the hon. Member for Thurrock, are not a nice-to-have; they are essential in helping people to live independently and participate fully in education and work, in avoiding crisis later on and in ensuring that everyone fulfils their potential. I therefore urge the Government to match their recognition of the importance of allied health professionals with meaningful action in workforce planning and resourcing. If we are serious about prevention, inclusion and long-term value for money across health and education, investing in that workforce and ensuring that funding reaches the frontline must be part of that commitment.
Cat Eccles (Stourbridge) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for her opening speech and my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) for securing this long-overdue debate.
As we have heard, allied health professionals make up the third largest clinical workforce in the NHS, yet sadly, time and again, we only hear about the health service in terms of doctors and nurses. Just last week, the Government announced a welcome package of measures to widen access to healthcare careers for people from disadvantaged backgrounds. It promised 2,000 new nursing apprenticeships and support for 2,000 young people from deprived communities to apply to medical school.
Those commitments really matter, but for AHPs, there was nothing—not a single initiative, not a single pathway, not even a mention. That omission is not an oversight; it is a pattern. For decades, successive Governments have failed to recognise the value of and to invest in this vital part of the NHS workforce. That is especially relevant given the increase in workforce required to deliver on the Department for Education’s SEND reforms. We need more speech and language therapists, physiotherapists and occupational therapists, so why do we not make it easier for more people to access those careers?
Before entering Parliament at the last election, I spent more than 20 years in the NHS as an operating department practitioner, and I am proud to be the first ODP here in Parliament. In fact, my time working in the NHS is in large part what politicised me and drove me to want to make the changes that are desperately needed to highlight and improve the profession. ODPs are unique within the healthcare workforce. At the point of graduation, they are the only professionals fully qualified to work across every area of perioperative practice: anaesthetics, surgery and post-anaesthetic care. My speech will focus on that profession.
As of March 2026, there were 17,906 ODPs registered with the HCPC. They are highly skilled and highly committed, with strong retention rates across the NHS. Many go on to hold senior clinical leadership roles, not just in the operating department, and they play a crucial role in patient safety, service efficiency and the successful running of our theatres. My profession plays a critical role in keeping the NHS functioning and in safeguarding patient safety every single day.
Given the recent reviews into maternity care, I want to highlight the importance of ODPs for maternal and neonatal safety. Nearly half of births are now done by caesarean section and ODPs are involved in every single one, playing a key role in the perinatal period. I therefore commend the College of Operating Department Practitioners for its recent contribution to NHS Resolution’s maternity (perinatal) incentive scheme safety actions. Given the importance of operating department practitioners to the NHS, they should be properly recognised, valued and supported; instead, too often they are forgotten, and that neglect has real consequences.
An area of serious concern is the eligibility of operating department practitioners to supply and administer medicines within their scope of practice using patient group directions, known as PGDs. That is holding the profession back and creates a perverse situation in clinical settings, where an ODP must seek the supervision of a nurse or doctor to administer certain medications. For example, post surgery, it is common for patients to experience post-operative nausea and vomiting. There is a suite of antiemetics that can be given without a prescription under a PGD, but an ODP caring for the nauseous patient cannot give relief without input from a nurse or doctor, thus delaying treatment and putting unnecessary pressure on colleagues. Another example is ODPs working in endoscopy units, where sedatives are routinely administered under a PGD. The ability to administer vaccines is also impacted: during the pandemic, ODPs were unable to support the vaccination effort due to the use of PGDs, yet bizarrely, a healthcare assistant could carry out that role. ODPs are being prevented from making a valuable contribution to public health and system resilience.
The Department recently carried out a consultation on expanding the supply and administration of medicines to ODPs, as well as to physiotherapists, paramedics and diagnostic radiographers, and we must move at pace to level the playing field to benefit both healthcare professionals and their patients. I ask the Minister to commit to adding ODPs to schedule 16 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 and to outline when that change is likely to be implemented.
Another example is the introduction of the graduate guarantee scheme for newly qualified nurses. While well-intentioned, its narrow focus has had the unintended consequence of some newly qualified ODPs finding themselves displaced and unable to secure posts with NHS operating departments. That is not just unfair to those professionals; it is short-sighted and risks wasting vital skills at a time when our health service can least afford it.
A review of band 5 nursing roles is under way, yet no equivalent review is taking place for operating department practitioners or other AHPs. This selective approach risks unpicking the harmonised pay structures established under “Agenda for Change” in 2004. The Royal College of Nursing has long pushed for a separate pay spine for nursing, but that would be absolutely the wrong move, breaking the concept of “one NHS team” and creating two-tier employment, particularly in operating departments.
We must uphold the fundamental principle of equal pay for equal work. Anything less would be a serious step backwards for fairness, morale and workforce cohesion in the NHS. Will the Minister therefore commit to ensuring that any review of band 5 roles includes AHPs so that parity and equity are properly protected?
I know that in a recent letter to the College of Operating Department Practitioners, the Minister stated that
“any review of the national profiles for ODPs would need to be supported by the NHS Staff Council, with the Job Evaluation Group—an established group of the Council—responsible for undertaking that review.”
That absolutely explains the process, but it cannot excuse the delay. It is vital that this work is taken forward promptly and with a clear timetable.
At the same time, ODPs and AHPs more broadly are still waiting for the publication of the NHS workforce plan. That plan, unlike those that came before it, must finally include meaningful, measurable commitments to the third-largest clinical workforce in the NHS, rather than relegating it to the margins once again. ODPs and AHPs more widely are not asking for special treatment; they are asking for recognition, fairness and a clear strategy that reflects the reality of how the NHS actually operates. As the third-largest clinical workforce, they are central to patient safety, service delivery and the long-term sustainability of the health service.
I would like to put on the record my concerns about abolishing the role of the chief AHP in NHS England. While the current chief nursing officer is a strong and passionate advocate of AHPs, I believe that we need the representation and oversight that a chief AHP can provide.
Finally, I would like to highlight the removal of NHS bursaries for allied health professionals. I was lucky enough to train with a bursary, receiving around £500 a month during my two years of training. While the recent introduction of apprenticeships has negated some of the costs of going to university, these places are limited and dependent on NHS trust training budgets. Getting into an excess of £30,000 of debt for a starting salary barely above the minimum wage does not incentivise prospective students to get into these professions.
After decades of being overlooked, warm words are no longer enough. What we need now is action: fair pay structures that are protected, sensible regulation that makes full use of professional skills, clear career pathways and a workforce plan that treats AHPs as integral to the future of the NHS. The message from ODPs and AHPs is clear: they want to contribute, lead and be part of the solution to the pressures facing our health service. It is time for the Government to act and give this vital workforce the recognition and support they have long deserved.
Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
I thank the hon. Members for Thurrock (Jen Craft) and for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) for bringing this important debate to the House. I echo the sentiments of other Members who have underlined the important work that allied health professionals undertake and recognised the role that these clinicians play in saving lives, providing care and keeping our NHS running. At a time when some patients experience corridor care, the service of allied health professionals is even more pivotal as their work helps to keep people out of A&E. These clinicians lend their expertise to help treat and care for people or to diagnose illnesses before they require urgent attention.
These practitioners have also volunteered to take even more strain off of emergency services, writing to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care last month to request additional responsibilities. In the letter, the allied health professionals asked for the Department of Health and Social Care to consider extending additional independent prescribing powers to their sectors. Currently, they are provided with negligible independent prescribing responsibilities despite many of these clinicians having undertaken the exact same training as other medical professionals. For example, podiatrists can prescribe medicine for their patients, but dietitians have only supplementary prescribing rights and have to be overseen by a doctor.
This issue was raised with me by one of my constituents who is a dietitian and who supported the allied health professionals’ request for additional prescribing responsibilities. She states that this change would not only reduce GP waiting list times, but recognise the studies that allied health professionals have undertaken and the expertise they possess. My constituent highlights the bureaucracy and farce of an allied health professional who runs their own clinic having to go and find a consultant to sign off their prescribing, even though they will have had all their prescribing permissions checked and signed off by the chief pharmacist in the hospital. That creates duplication of work at a time when we desperately need to make the NHS more efficient.
The Government’s Pharmacy First initiative has had success in encouraging patients away from GPs and towards pharmacists, who can prescribe medicine for common ailments. My constituent merely asks that the Government build on their own good work in this area and extend prescription powers to all allied health professionals equally. I would be grateful if the Minister considered my constituent’s request and responded to the letter sent to the Department for Health and Social Care last month.
Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)
I declare an interest as a member of the all-party parliamentary group on allied health professionals. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) on initially securing this important debate before her well-deserved promotion to Parliamentary Private Secretary, and thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for leading it.
It is right that we talk about doctors and nurses when we talk about the NHS and the difference that it makes to people’s lives and the lives it saves, but we often overlook the incredible contribution that is made by the group of 14 professions known as allied health professionals. Today I want to share my personal experience of the importance of these key workers. Without them, I would literally not be stood here today in this Chamber, speaking and serving as the Member of Parliament for North Durham.
Allied health professionals worked alongside doctors and nurses, as well as a host of other clinicians and non-clinicians, to save my life when I had a life-threatening illness in 2009 and then, to my mind, gave me my life back as they worked across disciplines to rehabilitate me following severe illness and disability. In 2009, I was hit by a sudden onset neurological illness called POEMS syndrome. It is a rare type of neurological disorder caused by a tumour that can affect multiple systems in the body. I spent five months in hospital being treated for and recovering from this illness, followed by an extensive process of recovery and rehabilitation in the months and years following it.
The symptoms of my condition were similar to multiple sclerosis, meaning that they affected my nervous system, which impaired my mobility, causing me to spend a year using a wheelchair and now to use a walking stick and orthotics, which Members cannot see but—[Interruption] —can just about hear.
Looking through the list of the 14 allied health professions, I was staggered by just how many of them I had been helped by. I will confine myself today to talking about the six or seven professions in this group from which I have personally experienced help and care.
At the beginning of my illness, when I was diagnosed, it was radiographers who contributed to diagnosing the tumour causing my condition, using a range of techniques from skeletal surveys to MRI scans to, eventually, a PET-CT scan. Once the tumour and its role were identified, they mapped its location to prepare me for radiotherapy and administered 30 days of 30 Grays of radiotherapy in the basement of University College London hospital. As I recovered, they measured the shrinkage and eventual elimination of my tumour using further PET-CT scans.
More recently, I have been back to see radiographers. I can actually remember the day of my last MRI scan, because when I went in, Liz Truss was Prime Minister, but when I came back out, the people looking after me said that the Prime Minister had resigned—she was not there for that long, but it felt like a long time inside the MRI machine. The radiographers were using the MRI not because they think there is a risk of recurrence of my illness, but to measure the long-term regrowth of my nervous system.
Following on from that, physiotherapists taught me to walk again. In fact, before that, they got me standing using a standing frame, because I could not stand independently. I had an intensive two-month period of in-patient physiotherapy on the rehabilitation ward of the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square. That was followed by almost a year of out-patient physiotherapy at home and in Saint Leonard’s hospital in Hackney. Support from my physiotherapist took me from being unable even to stand to taking the first faltering steps using a back slab, foot-ups and a walking frame, and then to using two crutches, one crutch and now a walking stick and ankle orthotics. As part of our recovery, the physiotherapists ask every neurological patient on the ward to set themselves a higher-level balance task to walk towards. They told me that I was the first patient they had met who set a higher-level balance goal of leading a canvassing team while carrying a clipboard and pen.
The dietitians in hospital were tasked with helping me rebuild my wasted muscles. They rather kindly asked me what food I like. Fortunately, when I answered “red meat and cheese”, they agreed that, at that stage, those were the ideal sources of protein to rebuild the muscles that had wasted away over five months spent predominantly in a hospital bed. My dietitians also ensured that friends or family occasionally took me from the hospital, in my wheelchair, to Carluccio’s restaurant in the nearby Brunswick centre, because the Italian-style liver and bacon served there very usefully contained the vitamins necessary for nerve regrowth.
As I prepared for, and then adjusted to, life outside a hospital ward, there came the support of occupational therapists, who taught me how to use a kitchen from a wheelchair—and later a perching stool. They taught me how to safely pour boiling water from a kettle when my arms were weakened. They taught me how to write again using a biro, when my ability to grip a pen had gone. Unfortunately, they did not get very far in teaching me how to cook again, as I had never got to grips with cooking even before my illness and disability. They taught me how to transfer safely from a wheelchair to a piece of furniture, and then back to the wheelchair again. They asked me what I needed to do in my life, and then worked as hard as they could to get me back to doing it.
One of the most fundamental tasks that the occupational therapists succeeded in—[Interruption.] Sorry, this is a little emotional. They succeeded in enabling me to get down on to the floor so that I could play with my three-year-old son, and then to get back up again, when my legs were too weak to lift me up and down. When I left hospital, they equipped my wheelchair-accessible flat—which my amazing wife had organised at five days’ notice, after moving from a non-wheelchair-accessible home—with the equipment that I needed to use it safely, such as a seat across the bathtub to shower myself safely.
My occupational therapists oversaw my return to work, explaining to my then employers what adaptations were needed to make to my workplace. They advocated on my behalf for a graded return to work because of the severe fatigue that my illness and disability had caused. They signposted me to the support available to my employers for transport to, from and within work, and for physical adaptations from the Access to Work scheme. They also assessed my workplace to ensure that I could physically get around it from a wheelchair.
Alongside that work, podiatrists helped me with a horrible side effect of having impaired sensory nerves in my feet: I was very susceptible to ingrown toenails. At first, I could not feel them because of nerve damage, but when they cut through, the pain was excruciating. I thank the podiatrists for dealing with that, and alleviating those nasty side effects, in the first few months after I left hospital.
I still receive ongoing support from the orthotists, who, once I was able to walk, fitted me with the ankle/foot orthoses—often known as splints—that I wear on each foot. They stop me from tripping over my feet—even now my weak ankle nerves cause foot drop. I continue to rely on the orthotists’ services when having my orthoses repaired, refurbished or replaced as necessary. That reminds me: I have an outstanding appointment to schedule with University Hospital of North Durham to have my orthoses refurbished in the coming months.
I am fairly sure that operating department practitioners were involved in my treatment, when I had an operation to enable analysis of the tumour once it had been located, but as I was under general anaesthetic and completely unconscious at the time, I cannot speak for who was in the room with the surgeon.
By now, it will be clear to Members across the House that I owe an enormous debt of gratitude to a wide array of people across the allied health professional workforce. It is that gratitude that drove me to speak in this debate in order to call for greater prioritisation of AHPs in NHS workforce planning and for parity of esteem with medics and nurses. I join colleagues in asking the Minister to recognise the critical contribution that allied health professionals make to allow people like me to live happy and healthy lives.
To back that recognition, the Government could retain in the Department for Health and Social Care the roles of chief allied health professions officer and director of rehabilitation, confirm which Minister holds responsibility for AHPs—although, given the very welcome presence of my hon. Friend the Minister for Secondary Care on the Front Bench, I think I might be able to guess—and restore quarterly ministerial meetings with the Allied Health Professions Federation.
Some of the specific professions involved in my treatment face their own unique challenges, which I want to ask the Government to address. The Chartered Society of Physiotherapy, with which I have worked closely in recent months, is campaigning to embed physiotherapy leadership in neighbourhoods. I back its calls for the upcoming NHS 10-year workforce plan to expand the capacity of core community rehabilitation services. Given the record number of physiotherapy graduates, and the high level of public trust in physiotherapists, who empower people to manage symptoms and improve general health, now is the time to take advantage of the healthy supply of physiotherapists to ensure that people can live as well as possible for as long as possible.
It is clear to me that physiotherapists can play a role in the Government’s ambitious healthcare shift away from hospitals and closer communities. However, in recent years recruitment freezes in physiotherapy have risked wasting the potential of newly qualified physios, so will the Minister meet me and representatives from the CSP to discuss widening access to physio careers through apprenticeship programmes, guaranteed NHS jobs for all newly qualified physio graduates—as has been rolled out for nurses—and other challenges facing this vital workforce? [Interruption.] I will come to a conclusion as quickly as I can, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The British Association of Prosthetics and Orthotics is asking for the creation of a formal “small and vulnerable profession” designation within NHS workforce and education policy in order to trigger proportionate safeguards and guarantees for those workers. The Royal College of Occupational Therapists is calling on the Government to establish national commissioning guidance to make occupational therapy a central component of the neighbourhood health systems that the Government are delivering. Will the Minister address those particular industry concerns and outline the Government’s broader support for the whole family of AHPs?
Without those professionals, I would not have got my life back. I want to use this platform to thank them, and to say that their fantastic professions need the pay, incentives and career structure to encourage the next generation of allied health professionals to support future generations in the way that so many of them have supported me.
Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)
I do not think that anyone could have better described the importance of AHPs than my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst). I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) for securing the debate and for her tireless work as a physiotherapist; to my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for leading the debate; and to my hon. Friend the Member for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles) for all her work as an operating department practitioner—a profession that is often overlooked.
Allied health professionals are such an important part of our healthcare workforce, yet they are undervalued and poorly represented in NHS hierarchies. I am incredibly proud of the Government’s achievements within the NHS, including the £29 billion of additional funding—the largest injection of cash into our health service since Labour was last in government—a 320,000 fall in waiting list numbers, 5 million more NHS appointments, and the recruitment of 2,500 new GPs.
In my constituency, we have started to see the benefits of that investment for local people. George Eliot hospital has eliminated corridor care despite a difficult winter. It has also seen a 5% improvement in waiting lists. GP surgeries in Polesworth, Bedworth, Coleshill and Keresley are all getting upgrades, so that more patients can see physiotherapists, occupational therapists and other professionals much closer to home. There is much more to do, of course, but we should be proud of the progress we have made in less than two years.
These improvements would not have happened without the support of allied health professionals. Their workforce represents over 276,000 practitioners, aided by skilled support workers. The Government are right to be ambitious in their target to deliver more care in the community and invest in neighbourhood health centres across the country. To do that, we will rely on allied health professionals to support patients. We must embed dietitians, occupational therapists, osteopaths and physiotherapists into neighbourhood health if we are to succeed in treating more people closer to home.
I commend the work done on frailty by the Hazelwood group practice in Coleshill as part of the Apollo primary care network. I also pay tribute to the work of paramedics, radiographers and physios. My constituency is semi-rural and without a hospital, so the quick work of paramedics is crucial in providing urgent initial care and supporting my constituents on their journey to hospital.
Radiographers are vital in supporting patients through early diagnosis, as I found out myself a couple of weeks ago. Some 80% of hospital pathways require their skills for imaging to support a diagnosis. As part of this Government’s plans to bring care into the community, we must ensure that more radiographers are in community diagnostic centres like the one recently opened at the George Eliot hospital in Nuneaton or available through mobile services, to reduce pressure on hospitals. That way, patients can be treated faster and closer to home. On their behalf, I would like to ask the Minister to keep the chief allied health professions officer post in the Department of Health and Social Care and work with local ICBs to establish AHP director roles that have parity with medical directors and directors of nursing.
In 2018 my father had a stroke. The staff at George Eliot hospital were wonderful and took really good care of him. I cannot thank them enough for the support they gave him, but there reached a point when I was wondering, why is my elderly father still stuck in hospital? Why can he not leave, so that we can help him get better from the comfort of his own home and my elderly mum does not have to travel 10 miles each day to see him? What is the plan for him and other stroke patients after they leave hospital?
My dad, like many people recovering from a stroke, could not get the same support from speech and language therapy services at home or in his neighbourhood. Those are vital services that help patients learn to swallow and slowly regain their ability to speak and be understood. So my dad had to stay in hospital. He is definitely a fighter, and he regained his speech and his ability to sing in a choir. Patients like him deserve to be able to see speech and language therapists in their local neighbourhood, so that they can recover at home once they are medically fit to leave hospital.
This is not about freeing up spaces in hospital; it is about giving patients choice and the best care we can, so that they can recover comfortably at home, surrounded by friends and family. I will continue to work with all allied health professionals and their representative bodies to ensure that they are a core part of this Government’s 10-year health plan.
Finally, as a tennis player, I would like to thank the thousands of independent physiotherapists, support workers and students working in local gyms, on the high street, in professional sports facilities and at matches at weekends. Their support is vital to ensure that people can continue to play sport as they get older and that an injury does not stop them getting back on the court. We promised to deliver healthcare in the community, and with the support of allied health professionals, I am confident we will be able to do so successfully.
Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for leading the debate and my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar), who has done so much incredible work as a physiotherapist previously and a staunch advocate of allied health professionals since her first day in this House. I pay tribute to the AHP community across my constituency.
In my past life, I had the pleasure of working at the Coventry and Warwickshire partnership NHS trust, and that experience shapes how I have approached this debate. Many Members have rightly recognised the roles of physiotherapists, paramedics, occupational therapists, and speech and language therapists, which are well recognised and rightly valued. But under the AHP umbrella are an incredible group of people I would like to pay tribute to: music, art and drama therapists. Those roles are not “nice to haves”; they are a vital part of our mental health workforce.
I saw during my time at CWPT how powerful the benefits of creative therapy are. As my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock described so eloquently in her excellent speech focused on paediatrics, for lots of people who have experienced trauma, who live with conditions that can make verbal communication difficult or who do not yet speak fluent English, such as refugees, common forms of talking therapy that work for so many people do not necessarily work for them. For those experiencing mutism, for example, creative therapies can be the only way they can access treatment. Through art, music and drama, lots of patients are able to process their experiences, communicate their emotions and rebuild a sense of self in ways that traditional models do not always reach.
At CWPT, there was a real investment in these services. Importantly, many therapists were directly employed, rather than brought in on short-term contracts. That not only offers stability to the workforce, but for patients it allows services to embed, relationships to develop and outcomes undoubtedly to improve. I had the privilege of seeing and hearing those patients’ stories for myself, and in so many cases the work of those therapists was quite literally life-changing.
Despite that, these professionals are often in short supply. Part of that issue, in my view, is visibility. These roles often are not spoken about in schools, careers advice and even, at times, in our broader conversations about the NHS workforce. There are now established degree and training pathways for these roles. They are skilled professions that require significant training and expertise and are recognised through professional bodies regulated by the Health and Care Professions Council, yet many young people with a creative inclination and flare are all too often unaware of them as a possible career path. That is a missed opportunity, both for those individuals, who often have a passion for caring and for sharing their creativity, and for our NHS and social care.
The Government are rightly focused on getting more people into work—in particular young people, who are facing a tough job market—and we should be thinking expansively about the routes that are available to them, including in creative and arts-based professions. For those who are drawn to the arts, music and drama, these roles can be a way to build a deeply rewarding, stable career in the NHS—a career that combines creativity with care and contributes directly to patient wellbeing. Importantly, for those who might have spent years navigating the uncertainty of freelance creative industries, these professions can provide a real sense of stability, progression and purpose, without them having to leave any of their skills behind. That is particularly true at times of life when stability is so valuable, such as when starting a family.
The Government have been clear that the workforce plan that will stem from the very welcome 10-year plan will focus on how we can make good on its priorities, including shifting care closer to patients, bringing fragmented services together and a greater focus on mental health. Sitting at the centre of the Venn diagram of all those things is creative therapies. Let us start with the therapists of tomorrow by improving awareness of those roles through schools, colleges and careers services. Let us look at widening training pathways, to ensure that these careers are open to a wide range of people, including career switchers.
Currently, there is a level 7—master’s level—degree apprenticeship for the three main forms of creative therapy, but as of this year, funding for level 7 apprenticeships has been largely restricted to under-21s, so the number of people accessing those higher-level courses will now be very small. Given that in mental health, many staff move up into roles from within the workforce, it would be fantastic if an apprenticeship pathway through to creative therapist roles could be developed, similar to what we see in nursing.
Above all, we should recognise that the impact of those already in these roles is not peripheral; it is central to so many patients’ care and recovery. Investing in this area would not only support individual recovery, which would ease pressure elsewhere in the system and enable the earlier intervention that so many Members have referred to, but lead to improved engagement and, ultimately, better outcomes. Art therapists, music therapists and drama therapists might not be the first roles we think of in mental health, but they can often be the ones that help our most vulnerable and isolated constituents to start to open up and communicate their experiences—often for the first time—and guide the way to wellbeing.
We talk a lot in this place about workforce shortages, and rightly so. There are thousands of young people out there, including in Cannock Chase, who love music, art and drama but perhaps worry about whether there is a career for them in creative industries. They might have absolutely no idea about the enormous contribution they would make in our healthcare workforce. This is partly about recognition, but it is also about being more imaginative in how we think about both healthcare and careers advice. It is a chance to give more people a way to use their creative passion to transform lives.
Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)
I am grateful to the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for opening the debate, and to the hon. Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) for her work on the APPG and as a physiotherapist.
Medical staff in my constituency and across the country are the backbone of our national health service. While doctors and nurses are often front of mind when the public think about the NHS workforce, as we have heard this afternoon an army of highly skilled professionals keep our health services running every single day. They save lives, provide comfort in moments of fear and, as set out so brilliantly by the hon. Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst), aid rehabilitation, enabling people to get back to their normal lives.
Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)
I am conscious that this debate is on a devolved matter, but I thought it worth mentioning that the Allied Health Professions Federation held a hustings for the Scottish Parliament elections earlier today. Topics included having input from health professionals during primary care and the crisis in vacancies. On rehab, does my hon. Friend agree that we need to ensure that allied health professionals get the access they need to, for example, care home patients, so that we can get those people out of hospital and into the right setting to receive the care that they need?
Alison Bennett
My hon. Friend is right. We know that with the right support, often from allied health professionals, people do not need to present at A&E and they can get out of hospital and into suitable accommodation with the right level of support much more quickly, which is better for them as individuals and also supports the NHS in carrying out its functions more efficiently.
Many of our allied health professionals—the third largest professional group in the NHS—do amazing work, as we have heard. They are central to prevention, diagnosis, treatment and public health. As pressures on our health and care services have grown, their role has become indispensable. From the paramedic first on the scene in an emergency, to the radiographer enabling rapid diagnosis and the physiotherapist helping someone regain their independence, those professionals are there at every stage of the patient journey. They are often the difference between life and death, between recovery and long-term disability, between dependence and independence, yet their contribution is overlooked.
After years of mismanagement, our NHS has been left on its knees. Nowhere is that more visible than in our emergency departments. We have seen avoidable deaths in A&E waiting rooms, we have seen patients waiting hours for ambulances, and we have seen the shocking normalisation of corridor care—patients left on trolleys without privacy, dignity or proper attention. There are now even reports of people receiving end-of-life care in hospital corridors. This is a health system under intolerable strain. Public confidence is being shaken. It is no surprise that two thirds of people are worried about long A&E waits.
The data is stark. Last year saw the worst level of 12-hour trolley waits ever recorded. On average, hospital trusts are now seeing thousands of patients waiting more than 24 hours in A&E every year. That is unacceptable. The Liberal Democrats have been leading the call to end corridor care within a year. We believe the crisis can be tackled, but only with serious, practical action. That includes creating a bank of safety net social care places and expanding step-down care for patients who are medically fit to leave hospital but still need support.
At the heart of the solution are allied health professionals. By delivering rehabilitation packages through physio- therapists, occupational therapists and others, we can help people leave hospital sooner, recover more quickly, and regain their independence at home. That is better for patients and it is essential for freeing up hospital capacity and ending the gridlock in A&E.
Will the Government commit to ending corridor care and 12-hour waits this year, and will they back that commitment with real investment in community care, social care and the allied health workforce? If we are to rely on those professionals—as we must, and as we already do—we need to support them properly. Right now, working conditions across the NHS are driving morale into the ground. Staff face inflexible rotas, burnout and, shockingly, workplace violence. That is not sustainable for them or for the patients they serve.
The Liberal Democrats have a number of proposals that we would be grateful if the Minister considered. We would establish a truly independent pay review body. We would expand access to affordable childcare so NHS staff can balance their family with their careers. We are also calling for action on everyday costs such as reducing car parking charges at hospitals. Those are practical steps that would make a real difference.
There are also growing staffing pressures among the allied health professionals. The Library reports that there has been a 57% increase in allied health professional full-time equivalents over the last decade, with the number of employees rising from 75,000 to 118,000. However, in conversations with the Royal College of Podiatry, it described high vacancy levels for NHS podiatry positions, a declining pipeline of applications to study podiatry programmes in England and rising demand for podiatrists’ services, all the while with the draw of working in the private sector. In physiotherapy, eight in 10 physiotherapists report that they do not have enough staff to meet demand, yet many services are facing recruitment freezes. Those contradictions speak volumes.
The long-delayed national workforce plan must finally deliver for allied health professionals. It must address regional shortages and embed these roles fully into workforce planning from the outset, not as an afterthought. If the Government are serious about shifting care into the community and focusing on prevention, investment in AHPs is essential. Too often, we see a gap between rhetoric and reality. While Ministers talk about prevention, funding decisions continue to prioritise short-term fixes elsewhere.
Our NHS is one of this country’s greatest achievements, but it cannot function without the people who sustain it. Allied health professionals are highly trained, autonomous practitioners. There are nearly 118,000 of them working across the NHS in England. They are central to modern, multidisciplinary care and to the future of a sustainable NHS. If we want a health service that prevents illness, reduces inequalities, and supports people to live healthier, longer lives, we must recognise and invest in their contribution. We must continue to fight for an NHS that works for patients, and we will continue to stand up for the staff, especially those too often overlooked, who are doing everything they can to get our NHS back on its feet, because they deserve nothing less.
Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)
May I wish you a very happy St George’s day, Madam Deputy Speaker?
It is a privilege to respond to this debate on behalf of His Majesty’s most loyal Opposition and to recognise the invaluable contribution of allied health professionals, especially those living and working in my Farnham and Bordon constituency. Having spent much of my career in the healthcare sector, including time working for the College of Occupational Therapists—before it was granted its royal title, which shows how old I am—I have seen at first hand the critical role those professionals play across health and social care, often without the recognition they deserve.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) on leading today’s debate, and the hon. Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) , a physiotherapist herself, for her work in securing it. The House is right to give time to those who do so much, often without fanfare. I want also to mention the hon. Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst), whose experience of care by allied health professionals was both extraordinarily moving and amusing. I have taken to heart his recommendation of a diet of red meat and cheese.
If this debate is to mean anything, we must address the central issue, which is workforce. Without a clear and credible workforce plan, warm words about allied health professionals will not translate into better care for patients. The Government’s still-awaited NHS workforce plan, due this spring, will be crucial. It is meant to set out how the ambitions of the 10-year health plan will be delivered. Without it, there remains real uncertainty about how workforce shortages and rising demands will be addressed, as the hon. Member for Thurrock highlighted so powerfully when she summed up the situation as “a crisis”. That matters, because allied health professionals are already helping to unlock capacity across the system. We see that clearly in the expansion of independent prescribing, which we as Conservatives support. By enabling allied health professionals to take on those responsibilities, pressure is reduced on GPs and specialists, and patients receive faster, more efficient care. It is a practical reform that improves outcomes, but one that depends on proper planning and support in order to scale it.
The challenge does not stop in the NHS; it extends directly into education and special educational needs and disabilities provision. As the vice-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for SEND, I see the growing reliance on an expanded workforce of therapists and specialists to support children with additional needs. From experience of working alongside occupational therapists early in my career, I know just how critical that support can be in helping children to access education and achieve their potential.
However, the pipeline simply does not match the ambition. Training an educational psychologist can take up to eight years and other key roles, such as speech and language therapists or occupational therapists, take many years to develop. Without a clear and actionable workforce plan, local authorities are left trying to bridge that gap themselves, often without the certainty or the funding required to do so effectively. I saw that at first hand in Hampshire, as I am sure you have, Madam Deputy Speaker. Proposed changes to therapy provision raised real concerns among professionals in my constituency, but through consultation, the council listened, protected staff and expanded the specialist roles. That is the difference that practical, locally informed decision making can make, protecting services while improving provision.
Unfortunately, by contrast, there is a growing concern that the Government’s approach risks creating uncertainty, rather than clarity. That is particularly striking when we consider the progress that had begun under the previous Conservative Government, rightly outlined by my hon. Friend the Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith) in her superb speech. Through the AHP strategy and the long-term workforce plan, clear steps were set out to expand the workforce, increase training places and grow apprenticeship routes into these vital professions. It was not perfect, but it was a plan.
What we see now, however, are drifts: no published workforce plan, no clear assessment of the impact of recruitment challenges, and decisions that risk weakening the very structures needed to support AHPs. The requirement for integrated care boards to reduce their budgets has already raised serious concerns. The Chartered Society of Physiotherapy has warned about the impact on leadership roles, and we are already seeing a reduction in senior AHP positions across the system. That is not strengthening the workforce but undermining it.
Jen Craft
I welcome the hon. Member’s comments on supporting the SEND White Paper through an allied health professional workforce plan. However, there is something of an amnesiac recollection from Conservative Members when it comes to looking at a decline in numbers of healthcare professionals, and allied health professionals are not unique in that. Would he like to say what happened to the figures for allied health professionals over the 14 years when the Conservative Government were in office?
Gregory Stafford
The hon. Lady, with whom I serve on the Health and Social Care Committee, always raises important points. What the last Government were trying to do—certainly by the end—with their workforce plan, which was the first of its kind, was to ensure that the workforce began to expand again. That is what all of us across the House are hoping that this Government will build on.
The Government have confirmed that they have no plans to extend the job guarantee to allied health professionals, and have made no assessments of the impact of recruitment delays on patient care. For a Government who often speak about the importance of the NHS, it is difficult to understand why the very professionals who play such a central role in recovery, rehabilitation and patient flow are being overlooked, as the hon. Member for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles) passionately highlighted. If we are serious about reducing waiting lists, improving outcomes and supporting patients across both health and education, allied health professionals are not optional but essential—and essential services require serious planning.
In conclusion, I will ask the Minister three simple questions. First, when will the NHS workforce plan be published and how will it specifically address the shortages in allied health professionals? Secondly, will the Government reconsider their decision not to include AHPs in the job guarantee, given the clear need to support and retain this workforce? Thirdly, what steps will be taken to ensure that NHS organisations and local services can recruit and retain the AHPs they need, particularly in under-resourced areas?
Without clear answers to those questions the risk is clear: we will continue to ask more of allied health professionals while giving them less support to deliver. From what I have seen throughout my career, including in my work with occupational therapists, that is not a position that any of us should accept for the workforce or the patients who depend on them
The Minister for Secondary Care (Karin Smyth)
I add my thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for introducing the debate and to my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) for bringing it forward and setting out her role as a physiotherapist.
I am grateful for the opportunity to set out the practical contribution of AHPs to delivering this Government’s priorities for health and care. I agree with many hon. Members who have spoken that the 10-year health plan, “Fit for the Future”, and the forthcoming 10-year workforce plan, due in the spring—we are now in the spring, so hopefully very soon—provide a real opportunity to optimise the AHP contribution for the years ahead, including by supporting AHPs to work at the top of their skills. As a Department, we are clear that the three shifts that patients and the public need—more care in the community, a stronger focus on prevention and better use of digital and data—must be delivered in day-to-day services. AHPs will be central to making that happen.
As we have heard, AHPs make up the third largest workforce in the NHS. They include physiotherapists, occupational therapists, radiographers, speech and language therapists, paramedics, dietitians, podiatrists, and arts therapists, among others. They work across hospital, community, primary care, mental health and education settings, bringing regulated, evidence-based practice that supports faster access, better outcomes and better value for the taxpayer.
The contribution of AHPs is not confined to any single service line. AHPs assess, diagnose, treat and rehabilitate. They support self-management and they work in multidisciplinary teams spanning health, social care and education. That combination—clinical autonomy alongside team-based working—is exactly what we need to redesign services around neighbourhoods and around people’s day-to-day lives.
First, on the shift to community, AHPs work across neighbourhoods, primary care and community services, including in people’s homes. They prevent avoidable admissions and they help people leave hospital sooner and recover well. Physiotherapists, occupational therapists and speech and language therapists support rehabilitation and independent living. Paramedics are increasingly part of urgent community response and neighbourhood teams, helping people get the right care, first time, closer to home.
Secondly, on the shift to prevention, prevention is fundamental to AHP practice, as we have heard. AHPs support earlier intervention for long-term conditions. They play a key role in falls prevention, respiratory disease and musculoskeletal health, and in improving population wellbeing. That work helps people stay well and independent, and it reduces pressure on urgent and emergency care and on hospital waiting lists. That contribution aligns directly with the Government’s work and health agenda.
By providing early intervention and rehabilitation, AHPs help people with long-term conditions, disability or injury to remain in, return to and thrive in work. We heard no better example of the role that they play than in the very moving speech by my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst). I thank him for sharing his experience and I hope he is still enjoying playing with his son. It is good to have him in the Chamber being able to articulate that experience, which is not easy to do. Whether supporting recovery after illness, managing pain and fatigue, or enabling reasonable adjustments and independence, AHPs reduce avoidable time away from employment and help more people to remain economically active, benefiting individuals, employers and the wider economy.
Thirdly, on the shift to digital, AHPs are helping to lead the adoption of digital tools to improve access and continuity. That ranges from imaging and diagnostic technologies led by radiographers, to virtual rehabilitation, remote monitoring and data-enabled triage. Alongside shared care records, these approaches can support safer, more efficient and more personalised care. Remote consultations should be used where appropriate.
Across each of those shifts, AHPs also make an important contribution to mental health and wider wellbeing. Occupational therapists support recovery and independence, speech and language therapists help to address communication needs that can affect engagement, and arts therapies, which we heard about, including art, music and drama therapy, offer clinically led support. As was well articulated by many, including by my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase (Josh Newbury), those skills in neighbourhood teams can help to provide earlier, more joined-up care, including for children and young people.
I place particular emphasis on children and young people, as my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock did so ably, including those with special educational needs and disabilities. AHPs play a vital role in early identification, assessment and intervention, supporting communication, mobility, sensory needs, mental wellbeing and participation in education and community life. Speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, physios and others work alongside families and schools so that children can develop, learn and thrive, meeting their needs before they escalate.
For children with SEND, timely access to AHP support is fundamental. Delays affect speech and language development, social interaction and educational attainment, and they can place additional pressure on families and carers. That is why work is already in train with the Department for Education, NHS England, integrated care boards and partners in local government to strengthen community speech and language therapy and other AHP provision. Our aim is earlier support closer to home and better, joined-up services.
I recognise that many hon. Members will understandably focus on the current access and waiting times, particularly for speech and language therapy. We as constituency MPs all recognise that. As my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock said, that is critical to achieving the Government’s ambition.
More broadly, in neighbourhoods, AHPs support people of all ages to avoid deterioration and to recover well through rapid assessment, rehabilitation and support management. That point was well made by the hon. Members for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith) and for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade). Working alongside GPs, community nursing, social care, mental health services and the voluntary sector, they help prevent complications, reduce frailty and improve long-term condition management, easing pressure on acute services, as my hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) rightly said. I thank her for her support for George Eliot hospital as it improves its services for her constituents.
Delivering those shifts depends on having the right AHP workforce in the right place. That includes those smaller AHP professions such as podiatry, orthoptics, and prosthetics and orthotics whose specialist skills are essential to prevention, independence and quality of life. Through our work with system leaders and professional bodies, we will continue to support education and training routes to improve retention and enable new ways of working across systems so that people can access specialist expertise when they need it.
As part of enabling AHPs to work at the top of their skills—that is what we want—we are also taking forward work to increase their ability to prescribe medicines where it is safe and appropriate to do so. That point was well made by the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney); others noted that duplication issue. I confirm to my hon. Friend the Member for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles)—I thank her for her expertise in operating department practitioners—that that does include ODPs.
We must also address variation in access, including in rural and underserved areas. Neighbourhood delivery models, stronger integration with local authorities and the voluntary sector, and sensible use of digital services can all help broaden reach while maintaining safe, personalised care for those who need face-to-face support.
AHPs bring the clinical skills and professional leadership to redesign pathways, strengthen neighbourhood teams and intervene earlier so that people receive effective care in the right place at the right time. My focus as the lead Minister for the workforce plan in the Department of Health and Social Care is to support systems to deliver those priorities. As part of that, I work closely with the chief allied health professions officer—it was news both to her and to me that there is concern about her ongoing role—and will continue to do so. I thank her for her help so far—indeed, including in preparing for this debate.
The 10-year plan set the direction to rebuild the NHS, but it absolutely depends on all our staff to deliver it. The long-term workforce plan produced by the previous Government essentially looked at supply, but it did not look at future service models, it did not look at the role of technology, it did not ensure sustainability for the future and it did not base itself on future workforce models. That is some of the reason why we have problems with, for example, bottlenecks and frustration—particularly for young people coming out of their training—in not being able to get into the right roles in the right places. That is part of the problem that we need to address with the workforce plan, which we will bringing forward in the spring, so that we ensure patients and the public have the services they deserve, and particularly so that young people and children get the best start in life. I look forward to bringing forward those plans.
I have been asked again for several meetings—it is always nice to be popular for meetings—and I look forward to working with people as we bring forward that plan. We are working closely with all representatives of the sector—I know that there is a lot of interest in this work—and I very much look forward to working with hon. Members in the House as we go forward with delivering the plan.
Jen Craft
I really appreciate the Minister giving way—I know that she was concluding her speech. She obviously cannot reveal the contents of the workforce plan before it is published, but particularly on paediatric care, can I ask specifically for reassurance that there is something in mind for the plan when it comes to servicing the SEND Experts at Hand provision? That will be key to delivering the White Paper aims and key to young people’s life chances. We hope to be able to see that soon.
Karin Smyth
I was literally on my last words, so let me go back. My hon. Friend tempts me to reveal more about the workforce plan. As I said, we are not waiting for the plan to work with our colleagues across the Department for Education, NHS England, locally in ICBs and so on to ensure that we deliver on that ambition. We will of course set out the overarching plan and where we want to have people in the future. I look forward to working with her and others on how that will work. We certainly want to engage with colleagues across the piece.
As my hon. Friend knows, the SEND White Paper—we all know this through our constituency work—is central to that and to the Government’s wider ambitions. We are due to publish the plan in the spring; I look forward to doing so very soon. I look forward to working with hon. Members on that, and I thank them for the debate and their contributions this afternoon.
Jen Craft
I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate. As my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) said, this is the first time a debate about the contribution of allied health professionals has happened in this place. It is really important to acknowledge the contribution they make to our health services and to healthcare in general. Particular thanks go to my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst) for sharing his personal story about the contribution of so many different allied health professionals in bringing him back to health—basically bringing him back to life—which summed up perfectly the crucial role these many different professions play and the impact they can have.
I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles) both for her contribution and for her work as an allied health professional. As someone who has had two C-sections, I know that the entire operating theatre staff were crucial to making that a much better experience than anyone could have anticipated.
I thank the Minister very much for her comments, and particularly for being gracious in accepting my intervention at the last minute. I make a final plea for her to ensure that this vital part of our NHS, which is crucial to delivering those two strands—from sickness to prevention and from hospital to community—is not overlooked in the forthcoming workforce plan, and that its contribution is both valued and given due prominence.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That his House has considered the contribution of allied health professionals.
Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Government placed a written ministerial statement on today’s Order Paper to update the House on the much-troubled Ajax armoured fighting vehicle programme. However, the media have reported within the last two hours that, according to urgent briefing from the Ministry of Defence, the statement will now be delayed until later next week due to the need to seek further interdepartmental approval across Whitehall. Given that the strategic defence review was published months late, the defence investment plan, including vital new equipment programmes, is still unpublished nine months on, and now the MOD is putting out WMSs on the Order Paper and then refusing to publish them, the Department is clearly in a state of chaos. Can you advise me on how we can force the MOD to clarify this utterly confusing situation later today, or on Monday at the very latest?
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I thank the hon. Member for giving notice of her point of order. This House is entitled to expect that when a written statement is to be delivered to the House, it will be done promptly on the day the Government have given notice that it will be made. Those on the Government Front Bench will have heard her point of order, and may wish to verify what is happening about the written statement. The hon. Member may wish to take advice from the Table Office on the steps that she can take to obtain clarity on the substance of the matter.
Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
(1 day, 12 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered reform of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency.
I am grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for granting time for a debate on a topic that, as I can see from the number of Members present, regularly fills the inboxes of right hon. and hon. Members from across the House. This debate is primarily about two closely connected issues: first, whether the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency is fit for purpose in how it delivers its current responsibilities, and secondly, whether it is equipped to play the role it should in improving road safety. Let me be clear from the outset that this is not about blaming the staff of the DVLA, who work under immense pressure and whom my constituents praise when they are able to get through. It is about whether the systems that the staff are required to use are modern, fair and safe, and whether they serve the public properly.
There is no doubt that the DVLA is a large and busy organisation. Last year alone, it issued 12.5 million driving licences and 17.9 million vehicle registration certificates, and handled more than 14 million contact centre inquiries. It is an agency that most people will interact with frequently throughout their lives. On the surface, the DVLA’s latest customer satisfaction survey looks positive, with reported satisfaction of 92%, but that figure masks a serious problem. Satisfaction drops by 20 percentage points when it comes to medical driving licences, and by 34 percentage points when people are asked about the time taken to reach decisions.
Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)
My hon. Friend mentions the business of medical decisions. In most cases, MPs and our caseworkers do not have the medical knowledge to be able to determine somebody’s fitness to drive. Although it is lovely for us to be able to restore people’s licences by intervening in their cases, does she agree that this really should not be our job?
Vikki Slade
I will come to some of those specific issues shortly. Our teams are incredible and work really hard, both here in Westminster and down in our constituencies, but that should not be necessary. People should not only get the help they need when their MP steps in.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
A lot of my constituents say that there is effectively a two-tier system: if someone is able to use the digital system, it is extremely fast; if someone has a medical condition, they have to use the paper form, which creates all sorts of administrative problems that we end up chasing up. My caseworkers say that the DVLA is one of the worst departments at responding to MPs’ offices. Does my hon. Friend think that the system has to change?
Vikki Slade
I thank my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour for his comments. I am afraid the DVLA is certainly in the top three worst departments, and I will come on to some specific cases shortly.
When constituents come to my office, they are frustrated but also really anxious. They have followed DVLA guidance by declaring their medical conditions, or they have reapplied for a licence after a temporary suspension, and then they wait, often for months, with no meaningful updates. The DVLA’s strategic priority is to drive up digital engagement, yet in practice the medical licensing system remains stubbornly analogue. The department does not routinely use email, it does not proactively chase missing documents, it does not provide status updates, and it still relies on posting medical questionnaires to GPs and consultants. Unless someone chases their MP, who then chases the DVLA and pushes the constituent to chase their clinician, cases simply stall. Applicants are left idling, with no sense of when or if the system will move them forward. This is not a functioning public service.
Let me give Members one example, which sadly is not unusual. Ellie submitted a medical questionnaire in March 2025 relating to possible epilepsy. Her symptoms stopped following B12 injections, and her consultant confirmed in writing that she was fit to drive. Six months later, she received a call from the DVLA, and she confirmed that there had been no further episodes. A month after that, her licence was revoked without her even being notified. She discovered that only in January 2026, when she happened to check her driving licence online.
When Ellie contacted the DVLA, she was told that her medical questionnaire was missing—one that had never been sent to her. After resubmitting the forms in February this year, she was informed that the original paperwork from last year could not be located. A full year after first engaging with the DVLA, her case is now classed as high priority after daily contact from her—sometimes 12 times in a day. No one should have to fight that hard to prove that they are safe to drive.
The underlying issue is simple: the DVLA is stuck in manual, while the rest of us are on automatic. Medical applications are processed strictly in date order, correspondence with clinicians happens by post, and returned documents then sit in another queue. This is a system designed around administrative convenience, not the human impact.
Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)
My hon. Friend is illustrating the challenges really well. I look forward to the Minister’s response, because I think, given the nods I have seen, that Government Members agree. I have a constituent—a councillor, in fact—who wants to be a driving instructor, and he has experienced the same delays. Does my hon. Friend agree that we want to hear an update from the Minister on the work to put those systems online so that they run parallel with everything else?
Vikki Slade
I have a taxi driver in my constituency who is stuck in a similar situation. This is not just about people who want to drive; it is about people who have to drive.
As our population is ageing, the scale of this challenge is growing. Last year alone, medical licence reviews increased by 16% to more than 850,000. The need to digitise this part of the system is not optional; it is urgent.
Some constituents are told not to worry, because they may be able to drive under section 88 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
indicated assent.
Vikki Slade
I can see that the Minister agrees. However, section 88 applies only in limited circumstances. It does not cover cases in which a licence has been revoked, and it creates real uncertainty. It forces people to navigate legal and insurance risks without a sat-nav to assist them. I have a resident who was travelling to Portugal and was not able to invoke section 88 abroad. I have another resident who was told that her no-claims discount on her insurance would be cancelled if it took much longer to get her licence back—she had worked on that no-claims bonus for 17 years.
This problem does not only affect older drivers or those renewing licences; young people are caught out too. My constituents Max and Maisie declared childhood medical conditions when applying for their provisional licences and waited for six months, with no progress beyond being told that information was required. In both cases, provisional licences were issued shortly after my office intervened, showing that the system can respond quickly when pressure is applied, but young people should not have to rely on interventions by MPs simply to take driving lessons and participate in everyday life.
These are not just anecdotes from constituency offices. The Public Accounts Committee found in 2023 that since 2020, 3 million people applying for licences by post or declaring medical conditions experienced significant delays. Over the same period, almost all of the 17 million people applying online without medical conditions had their licences processed within three working days. Great service should be available to everyone, not just the healthiest.
Various charities reinforce that picture. Epilepsy UK reports increasing calls from drivers who have complied with all the guidance and whose clinicians have returned all the information, and who yet remain unable to drive for months after being medically eligible. Diabetes UK has shared DVLA data showing that less than 5% of medically restricted licence reviews result in refusal or revocation, suggesting that the vast majority of people caught up in delays pose no greater risk to road safety.
That brings me to the second part of this debate. If the DVLA is to move beyond processing delays and play a meaningful role in improving road safety, we need to talk about eyesight. The UK’s eyesight testing regime is out of step with other nations and is largely unchanged since 1937. It relies heavily on self-declaration and a basic numberplate test, with no mandatory eyesight checks after passing the driving test. The Government’s road safety strategy suggests introducing mandatory eye tests at licence renewal for drivers over 70. I want to be absolutely clear that this is not about targeting older drivers; vision loss does not follow a special birthday, and focusing solely on age risks undermining public confidence and missing the real issue. If safety is the goal, an age-based approach alone misses the mark.
I have spoken to the hon. Member for Leicester South (Shockat Adam)—he could not be in the Chamber this afternoon—who is an optometrist. He told me that he frequently sees patients whose eyesight is far below safe driving standards. He described how some of his patients could not see the board, let alone the letters on it, yet he is unable to inform the DVLA or even those patients’ GP of their inability to see properly. I also met the Association of Optometrists, which welcomed the principle of mandatory testing but warned that limiting it to over-70s is short-sighted. [Laughter.] Thank you.
Vision can deteriorate at any age, so testing should be linked to licence renewal, which currently takes place every 10 years for most drivers. There is a wider opportunity here—eye tests can detect serious conditions such as glaucoma, cataracts, cancer and lupus. Allowing optometrists to share their results digitally with ophthalmology services could reduce pressure on the NHS and allow people to be diagnosed earlier, thereby lessening the impact on their sight, while also improving road safety.
Residents in my constituency of Mid Dorset and North Poole agree. Alan told me that it is not just about reading a number plate at a distance; he raised the issue of reflex testing, and also said that
“It’s essential to read on the move—signposts, hazards and vehicle instrumentation”.
He raised particular concerns about night-time driving, which is not assessed as part of the driving test. Alison welcomed mandatory testing, because she had found that family members who were no longer fit to drive were difficult to persuade to give up their licence. She concluded that without a formal test and a medically trained person making the decision, unsafe drivers would continue to add unnecessary risk to the roads. A 2025 prevention of future deaths report described the current system for enforcing vision standards as “ineffective and unsafe”. While concerns about the impact that extending testing would have on the DVLA’s workload are real, safety has to come first.
I welcome the road safety strategy, which goes some way towards recognising the role of driver licensing in improving safety. However, it fails to address the issue of cognition, or to acknowledge that many people continue to drive because they have no alternative. Given that bus services in rural areas are patchy at best, and without joined-up working between the NHS and the DVLA, alongside full digitisation of the licensing process, serious concerns remain about whether the system is fair and whether the improvements to road safety that we all want to see will be fully realised.
As such, I have a number of questions for the Minister. First, can he update the House on when the long-promised digital medical licensing system will go live, and whether it will include automatic chasing of medical information and real-time status updates for applicants? Secondly, will the Minister confirm whether the system of medical licences and the list of notifiable conditions are under review, given how few cases result in revocation? Thirdly, on the issue of eyesight, how many of the 62 deaths linked to poor vision in the decade to 2023 were actually caused by drivers over 70? Given that 4,000 bus and lorry drivers had their licences revoked for eyesight issues in the past three years, none of whom is likely to have been over 70, why does the strategy focus almost exclusively on older drivers rather than on vision standards?
Finally, I have previously asked in this place whether we can expect a road safety Bill in the next King’s Speech, to turn strategy into reality, but I did not receive an answer. I urge my constituents to respond to the open consultation before 11 May, and I ask the Minister to set out the next steps, including how he is working with NHS colleagues and when this House can expect legislation to genuinely reduce the risks on our roads.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
Members might be interested to know that we will come to the Front-Bench spokespeople at half-past 4. About 10 Members are standing, so you can work out that a time limit will not be needed, unless they talk for an excessive 10 minutes each.
Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)
I thank the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) for securing this important debate. Roads are the arteries of our nation, keeping us and our economy moving, and the rules governing our roads rely on being able to identify vehicles and their drivers, which is the responsibility of the DVLA. It really matters. It matters to His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs for road tax to pay for upkeep; it matters to those of us who want to walk, drive and cycle safely; and it matters to the police, who can use number plates to work out who is using our roads. When the rules of the road are not enforced—when people flout them with no punishment—it degrades trust.
I will highlight two elements of the DVLA systems that are failing: first, the regulation of number plate sales, and secondly, the rise of ghost vehicle owners due to there being no registered keeper. I will start with number plates, the little piece of plastic on the front of a vehicle, which most people hopefully never have to think too much about. Number plates are the quiet bedrock of how we enforce the rules of our roads. Number plates should tell us who owns a car, and they should be readable by cameras so that the police can use automatic number plate recognition software, which is essential for their work.
In many other countries, number plates are treated as what they are—passports for our roads—and are highly regulated. In France, for example, vehicles are allocated a plate for life, with no changes permitted, and in many other countries only one or a few companies can sell plates. The UK system looks absurd in comparison. To become a number plate supplier here, someone simply pays a £40 one-off fee to the DVLA. There are no background checks and no criminal checks. This has led to a situation where the UK has more than 34,000 suppliers registered as selling number plates with the DVLA. For context, that is four times the number of petrol stations in Britain.
If the DVLA had the ability to check that all those companies were doing the right thing—that they were asking for ownership documents and ID documents when they sold the number plate to someone, and only selling plates that were fully readable and not ghost plates—the situation would be fine, but the DVLA does not do that, and it will never be able to check so large a system.
I have no doubt that most people buying a number plate are doing so for innocent reasons, but it is crystal clear that many people are buying dodgy number plates to make themselves invisible to speed cameras, to avoid paying road charges and to commit serious crimes, and unscrupulous sellers are allowing that to happen. To give an example, in 2025 a young man was murdered in cold blood in Slough, and the police eventually worked out that the killer’s car was using a cloned plate. When the police found the car, it had no plates on, but it had a stash of different registration plates in the back. They found the person who sold the cloned plates, and he was fined £5,500 and removed from the DVLA register for five years, after which time he is perfectly allowed to start selling number plates all over again. There is a live rape case, which I will not go into any detail on, where a driver used a ghost number plate on his vehicle when he committed the alleged offence.
I have heard so many cases of drug dealers using ghost plates to go undetected by ANPR and fraudsters copying other people’s number plates. These dodgy companies sell cloned number plates without a second thought, and law-abiding drivers are left to pick up the pieces as they fight to prove that they are innocent of a crime or appeal against huge financial penalties.
Dodgy number plate sellers are a public scandal waiting to happen. They are the next chapter in the candy shops or dodgy vape shops story. Those businesses are really fronts for money laundering and criminality. Rochdale trading standards has been superb at exposing this. Its work has uncovered links between DVLA-accredited suppliers and individuals with histories of murder, firearms, drugs, robbery and violent assault—you couldn’t make it up. In one of its inspections, it found 20 number plates that had been sold with none of the legally required ID checks or proof of vehicle checks. Almost half of those plates were later linked by the police to serious and organised crime. Rochdale trading standards officers described finding DVLA-registered suppliers operating out of back bedrooms and garden sheds. One supplier was at 33 Smith Street. The next supplier was at 35 Smith Street. I hope I am painting a picture of the serious systemic failings in how the DVLA operates number plate sales in Britain.
With some estimates saying that up to one in 15 of all vehicles on UK roads has some kind of non-compliant plate, we can see the scale of the problem. Some of these suppliers are using ghost materials so routinely that even law-abiding members of the public may be inadvertently buying ghost plates. I urge anyone listening to this debate that if they need to buy a number plate, they should please ensure that the seller asks for their car ownership document and ID. If they do not, that person is buying from an illegal seller who is breaking the law.
Last year, the all-party parliamentary group for transport safety carried out an inquiry into registration plates and made 10 recommendations, all of which I believe the Government should implement. They include banning the use of 3D and 4D plates, introducing background checks on suppliers and restricting the number of licensed sellers. I would like to praise the Government for committing to action on this in the road safety strategy, and in particular I pay tribute to the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood), who has been absolutely great. However, can the Minister update us on when he hopes some of these system changes will be made to tighten up the number plate system? In particular, will he ask the DVLA what is going on with banning 3D and 4D plates, which are the vast majority of ghost plates, and will he update us on when the next Department for Transport roadside survey will take place, because the last one was in 2023?
I will now move on to the second topic that I am concerned about: vehicle registered keeper information. Even if a driver has a fully compliant number plate, it is still possible for them to cheat the rules and become a ghost on the roads in another way. All cars should have a registered keeper listed with the DLVA but, unfortunately, lax rules mean that many cars do not have, and their owners are therefore completely untraceable. Think about it: with hit and runs, excessive speeding and running red lights, even when a vehicle gets caught on camera doing any of those things, if the DVLA has no information about who owns the vehicle, there is no way to hold those people to account.
According to the DVLA, 7% of vehicles have no registered keeper, and it argues that the majority of them are in the motor trade, but I just do not think that is true, and I have a personal anecdote to explain why. Last summer, I was out with the roads policing team in West Brom, and the ANPR monitor in the police car kept dinging every 30 seconds. I asked the officer, “What is setting off the ANPR?” and the officer said, “Those are cars with no registered keeper.”
Today, The Guardian has covered a shocking freedom of information request made by the British Parking Association to the DVLA. When a car has no registered keeper or it has an outdated or incorrect keeper address, the DVLA sometimes registers the vehicle to its own address. The DVLA has admitted in answer to this FOI request that, at the latest count, 18,260 vehicles are currently registered to its own office in Swansea.
The rise of these ghost owners undermines our ability to enforce the rules of our roads, and it is not just a safety risk. I spoke to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau about the rise in the number of collisions when one party cannot be traced because the vehicle has no registered keeper, the number plate is fake or a ghost plate, or the driver raced away. We all pay a premium on our insurance to cover the costs when uninsured or untraceable drivers are involved in a collision, and that adds up to £50 on the insurance premiums of all of us every year.
There is also a big cost, or rather a big loss, to the public sector through this issue. I feel the pain as much as anyone does when I get slapped with a parking ticket when I think I have done the right thing, or I get a fine for driving down the wrong road. However, some people are flouting the rules constantly, and they are getting away with it by having a car with no registered keeper, or registering with a NIP—notice of impending prosecution—farm so their fine gets sent to a totally anonymous post office box and the fine does not get passed on.
Since I started doing this work, I have realised how much of an issue unpaid fines are. In Hackney, for example, a single individual owes the council £250,000. I recently asked my council, Sandwell, how much it was owed, and I was shocked to discover that almost one third of penalty charge notices had gone unpaid since last April, equating to £1.2 million. Can hon. Members imagine what that money could have been spent on?
I will finish because I know other Members want to speak. A great many good people work in the DVLA, as the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole mentioned, and I know that because I have spoken to lots of them. What is failing here is the system, including how we sell the very plates that identify all our vehicles, and how we regulate and monitor who actually owns the cars on our roads. I know the DVLA has a lot on, but this is a very serious problem, and there is huge opportunity to grasp here, to fix the system for the future.
Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)
The hon. Member is making an excellent speech, which has reminded me of a conversation I recently had in my constituency. Drivers in the area of Hooe and Plymstock are showing really antisocial behaviour, and one of the police officers I was with mentioned this fact. We were not even talking about how cars are registered to the DVLA, but does she not find extraordinary the number that are registered to Mickey Mouse?
Sarah Coombes
That is absolutely true. Vehicles are registered to Mickey Mouse, or to big organisations’ addresses. There are simply no checks whatsoever on whom people register vehicles to, which means they are doing really dangerous and really antisocial things, and getting away with it.
The Labour Party manifesto committed us to taking back our streets, and reforming the DVLA will help us tackle the racers, fraudsters, drug dealers and dodgy number plate sellers who are making our constituents’ lives a misery. This situation has gone on for too long. Now that the Government are committed to action on this, I hope we can finally catch the ghost plates and the ghost owners on our roads, and make all our roads safer for us all.
Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) for securing this important debate.
I want to keep my contribution brief and focus on the story of just one of my Guildford constituents—although I have had correspondence with many more—which I think really captures why the DVLA is in urgent need of reform. When someone reports a medical condition to the DVLA, they are doing it for the right reasons: they are complying with the law and putting the safety of their fellow road users ahead of their own convenience. But too often, the system does not respond in kind.
My constituent is living with stage 4 lung cancer. Despite being asymptomatic, they responsibly surrendered their licence in August 2024. They did so without hesitation, because they understood their responsibilities and wanted to be a good citizen. Their consultant has since confirmed that they are medically fit to drive. On that basis, they applied to have their licence reinstated in July last year. When I spoke to them last week, nine months later, they were still waiting for a decision—nine months! During that time, they have submitted multiple complaints: one in January; one later that month; and, finally, one in March through the DVLA’s own direct complaints system, which promises a response within 10 days. Not one of those complaints has received a reply. That is not simply a backlog; it is a system that has lost sight of the fact that its administrative processes have real human consequences. While managing a life-limiting illness, my constituent has also had to manage months of uncertainty about when or even whether a decision will be made and the daily restrictions that come from living without a driving licence.
As we have heard, that is not an isolated case. Across the country, constituents are waiting months for medical decisions, often with minimal communication. There is a clear pattern: straightforward cases move quickly, and complex cases—the ones that need the most care and judgment, which are often the most urgent because of the circumstances of the individual—wait the longest. My constituent had no symptoms that would disqualify them from driving, but they have been left in limbo for nine months without explanation.
The DVLA’s target is to resolve most medical cases in 50 days, but even if the target was met consistently—we know it is not—we should really be asking whether 50 days is an acceptable length of time for someone’s independence to be put on hold. The impact is real: people cannot get to work, they miss medical appointments, they lose their independence, and they become isolated from support networks that they rely on. Thankfully, my constituent can use public transport, but in so many Members’ constituencies, particularly the rural ones, a driving licence is not a luxury but a lifeline.
The strain on the system is only going to increase. The proposed introduction of eye testing for drivers over 70 may be sensible for road safety, but it will only increase the volume of medical assessments that we already know the DVLA is not coping with processing. How will it cope when it is already failing so many?
Reform is not optional, and it is urgent for my constituent and for all our constituents who are contacting us on a daily basis. I am afraid that digitisation alone will not fix this. What we need alongside digitisation is far more basic: clear decision-making timelines, reliable communication with applicants, and better co-ordination between the DVLA and the NHS and other agencies so that medical evidence can be promptly assessed. I hope the Minister will be able to set out a clear timeline for reform so that I can reassure my constituents, and in particular the constituent I have mentioned today. If we ask people to follow the rules and they put other people before themselves in surrendering their licence, the state has a duty to respond promptly and proportionately.
Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)
In the west midlands, the average waiting time for a driving test is 22 weeks—nearly six months, up from 12 weeks in October 2022. That often means that young people are unable to take a driving test before taking their A-levels or leaving home for university.
When I was growing up in Atherstone, getting my driving licence was a milestone for my independence. It meant I could see friends, share the driving with my parents when they picked me up at the end of term from university, and take up jobs that simply were not reachable by bus. And when I reached 21, driving the Leeds University night-time women’s minibus provided me with a good income and some great fun, and I was providing an excellent service. In fact, without learning to drive as a teenager and building up my confidence in driving, I would not have been able to drive a group of students from Leeds down to London, and also across to Manchester, to protest against section 28.
That is why I find it so frustrating that so many young people in North Warwickshire and Bedworth are now stuck on endless waiting lists for their driving tests. In a rural area with poor bus connections and unreliable timetables, a driving licence is not a luxury—it is crucial. It gives young people the independence and confidence to pursue education, training and work in neighbouring towns and cities.
I also want to talk about the freight and logistics industry. It is one of the largest employers in my constituency, offering excellent apprenticeships and training opportunities for school leavers ready to start their careers, but buses simply do not run frequently or at the right times for shifts at those hubs. My constituents who are waiting for driving tests are effectively locked out of those opportunities.
An elderly constituent called me because her driving licence was stuck with the DVLA, preventing her from being able to get around. My team and I contacted the DVLA and spoke to a member of the team, who reissued her driving licence fairly promptly. She told me how grateful she was and how much it would help her, but it should not take MPs getting involved to deal with these issues. For people like my constituent, a driving licence is a lifeline, allowing her to get to appointments, shops, and nearby villages and towns to see friends and stop being isolated. The DVLA must process requests in a timely manner to ensure that people are not left isolated in rural communities.
In 2021, the UK experienced a huge shortage of heavy goods vehicle drivers, which was compounded by the delays in tests for HGV licences. Luckily, that situation has improved, with current practical test wait times broadly acceptable at around three weeks; the real problem now is with the availability of theory tests for HGV drivers. As HGV candidates must sit multiple theory tests—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
Order. It might be helpful if I highlight that driving tests are governed not by the DVLA, but by the DVSA—the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency. The subject of this afternoon’s debate is very specifically the DVLA. Perhaps Members might take that as a point of information and constrain their remarks to the DVLA.
Rachel Taylor
My apologies. I think when most of our constituents think of the DVLA and the DVSA, they think of them as one and the same, but thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for correcting me on that point.
I think it is still fair to say that young people need access to their driving licence, and that the many people with health conditions who might have to hand in their licence are reliant on it coming back quickly. My own mum has to take my dad around for hospital appointments; she cannot get to her nearest shop or go out to see her friends. There are real impacts here for people who have suffered minor strokes, for example, and have not had their driving licence returned. It is a situation that the Government need to look at, and I would be grateful for anything that the Minister can tell us to inform the situation. I thank the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) for securing the debate.
Brian Mathew (Melksham and Devizes) (LD)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) for securing such an important debate.
I was recently contacted by a young person in my constituency who has been trying and failing to get a provisional licence for three years after a series of medical issues. Despite being cleared as safe to drive and, according to the DVLA’s standards, ready for their licence, their application has not progressed, and the DVLA has been impossible to contact. As a knock-on effect of the DVLA’s poor management, my constituent is struggling to get work and travel to interviews, and must rely on family and friends to get anywhere.
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. The Public Accounts Committee found that more than 3 million people across the country have experienced long delays in the application process, leading to lost income and lost opportunities. The DVLA seemingly operates a two-tier system where the simple cases breeze through and difficult cases, such as those of people with medical conditions, are ignored and left to gather dust.
Just yesterday, another constituent wrote to me to say that the situation with the DVLA caused her so much stress that she had decided to give up, having lost all hope. Even though she had made a formal complaint, to which it was meant to respond within 10 working days, the DVLA took nearly 50 days to respond.
I urge the Government to treat reforming the DVLA seriously. Changes need to be made, alongside reform of the DVSA, so that the two agencies can best manage the issues and the current backlog of cases. The delay in responding to applications for medical licences and complaints is symptomatic of a larger problem of inefficiencies across the whole system, from non-compliance to vehicle excise duty, leading to the loss of vital revenue for the Government. The ability to drive gives a person their independence, especially in rural areas, and these administrative errors affect real people’s lives. I again urge the Government to take reform seriously.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
I thank the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) for securing this important Backbench Business debate. I am grateful to her and her fellow Liberal Democrat Members, the hon. Members for Guildford (Zöe Franklin) and for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew), for raising issues that I will shortly touch on.
Time and again, my office has to deal with people who are having all manner of problems with the DVLA. Like colleagues on the Liberal Democrat Benches, I want to highlight the issue of people—often elderly people—who have had to surrender their licence due to medical concerns and have experienced trouble as a result. Even once they are medically cleared to drive again, it can often take many months for the DVLA to return their licence.
I will give three examples of real people living in my Erewash constituency who have had their lives unnecessarily disrupted because of administrative delay and failure, pure and simple. There was a couple in Breaston, one of whom had their licence taken away after a routine medical check-up. They were medically cleared pretty quickly, but it still took the DVLA two months to restore their licence. They had been in the process of selling their car at the time, and the sale was completely disrupted. Similarly, my team recently helped a man in Ilkeston who waited four months after being cleared to drive to have his licence returned. At the most extreme end of the scale, my team recently helped a woman who had had her licence taken away due to moderate sleep apnoea. She, too, was quickly okayed to drive again after further medical assessment, only for the DVLA to take seven months to finally return her licence.
These are not old cases, and I only picked the three worst from the 18 months that I have been a Member of Parliament. All these cases have been handled by my team in recent months, and they were resolved only because of a Member of Parliament’s intervention. We have heard from colleagues across the House how it is deeply inappropriate that Members of Parliament should have to step in to resolve these cases. It is simply not good enough.
In Erewash, four in every five households depend on a car to get around. I am always advocating for more and better public transport, on which I regularly engage with the Minister. We have some good services and connections, but going without a car for months on end is not just an inconvenience for my constituents; it is an enormously disruptive problem that prevents people from getting around every day.
Especially in anticipation of new rules to make our roads safer, someone really needs to look at how the DVLA handles health-related cases and interacts with elderly drivers. Clearer timelines would be beneficial, as would improved communication between the DVLA and the people who are forced to rely on its services. I would greatly appreciate it if the Minister could comment on his and the Department’s work on that front. What most needs to be recognised is that, for people who have lost their licence and not had it back for months, through no fault of their own, not being able to drive means that their life is put on hold. That is not right, and I seriously hope that the DVLA can get it sorted.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) for securing this debate.
Dozens of my constituents have come to me with stories of DVLA failure, each carrying a variation of the same theme: a system that has let them down, often involving delays in licence renewals or restorations related to medical conditions. Let me take the case of one self-employed constituent who, due to delays with restoring their licence, has lost more than £60,000-worth of work. For months, their livelihood, security and mental health were left hanging by a thread. Only after pressure from my office was the matter resolved. It was a medical case and the DVLA failed to justify the delay. Another constituent, who must renew every three years owing to a medical condition, had their licence rejected because the DVLA incorrectly claimed that they had changed their name. That single administrative error cost them six months of their licence.
A third constituent appealed against the decision on their medical fitness. In response, the DVLA sent them the full medical records of another person, then spent three months arguing with the GP practice over the medical fee. The DVLA was prepared to pay only a fraction of what the GP wanted. My constituent offered to pay the difference to end the argument, but that was refused, and they had to make an inconvenient journey to a distant, DVLA-approved GP. When the licence eventually came, it was granted for one year only. The case has been ongoing for over three years—it was originally with my predecessor. Those are just some of the cases affecting my constituents. The common denominator is not the medical condition itself; it is the fact that every one of them involves a medical issue, and every one of them has been delayed for reasons that the DVLA has never made clear.
The DVLA does not operate in isolation. It depends on GPs, consultants and the wider NHS to provide the evidence it needs to make decisions. When those channels fail, the DVLA fails with them, and my constituents are the ones who pay the price. Through a freedom of information request, a constituent discovered that the backlog for medical renewals alone stands in excess of 260,000 cases. As has been mentioned, the 2023 Public Accounts Committee report found that nearly 3 million people who had notified the DVLA of medical conditions had experienced long delays, with some losing employment and income as a direct consequence.
Of the Committee’s 11 recommendations, the then Government accepted 10. The one they declined was a strategic review of how cases involving medical conditions were handled, bringing together the DVLA, the Department of Health and Social Care and the NHS. My casework suggests that the rejection of that recommendation was short-sighted. One of my constituents waited five months simply for a consultant to be asked to review their records, never mind all the steps that had to happen after that. The DVLA knows the problem. The Department of Health knows the problem. My constituents certainly know the problem. The only question left is whether this Government do.
Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) on securing this debate.
This is one of those occasions where I do not have a written speech from my staff. Most MPs, I suspect, use some sort of casework system; I am up to almost 20,000 cases at the moment, but when a constituent visited me at my most recent surgery, I think his case number was between 2,000 and 3,000. I was shocked to see that someone who had come to me so early was still on our database, and this debate reminds me of his extraordinary situation.
My constituent Kevin Flemming, who has allowed me to talk about his case, had an incredible moment in his life where he was told he had a benign tumour in his brain. He described to me the shock of that moment, as a young man with children. He went through the whole process of diagnosis and treatment; thankfully, the tumour was benign and he managed to get himself back to full health. To be quite frank, however, the DVLA has acted in a way that I find completely unacceptable for an institution that is meant to serve the people of this country. The rules on parliamentary language mean that I cannot repeat here the words that I used at my surgery on Saturday, but it should not be the case that someone who has gone through the six-month wait after a procedure and who has had it medically proven that their sight has not changed or deteriorated throughout that two-year process should still be waiting for an answer about when they are getting their licence back.
My constituent has worked for HMRC. He has worked with the public. He has helped businesses. He is a public servant. It takes him an extra three hours to get to and from work because of the situation that he has been forced into. I credit HMRC, which I would not usually in this place, because it has given my constituent the ability to work from home more often. However, he wants to be in the office; he wants to lead his team to provide a quality service for the people he works with. Shamefully, he has now had to choose semi-retirement, because he still has not had his licence back. Not only did he have to go through the process of thinking about whether he might die, but he now feels isolated and like his self-worth has been diminished just because he wants to do the basic thing, which is to go out and provide for his family.
I was shocked when I became an MP to find that 85% of my casework is about chasing public institutions to do the job that they are meant to do. My hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) mentioned the DVSA—we could have a whole debate on that, but I know, Madam Deputy Speaker, that we are not allowed to do so right now. It is unacceptable that, just because we send an email from a parliamentary email address, suddenly the seas part and things are resolved. Some of my constituents will not come to me to support them, because they do not know that I can help them. Quite frankly, it should not be that way.
I again thank the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) for bringing the debate forward. I can imagine that Kevin in my constituency is not the only person who has had to make a huge financial decision to get on with his life, which will undoubtedly impact how he can support his children in future. I am sure that the Minister will respond to all the points put forward by everybody today. This is not just about an administrative process and trying to get some waiting times down; it is about something that is having a material impact every day on the people we represent. How that is allowed to happen is beyond the realms of my thinking.
Rachel Taylor
My hon. Friend is making a passionate speech. There is a real danger, given that delays are having such an impact on our constituents, that they and others will be led to not being honest about medical conditions, so that they can keep their driving licences. The knock-on effect of that on safety on our streets is unimaginable.
Chris Bloore
I completely concur with my hon. Friend’s point. We are asking people to play by the rules, yet the rules do not work for them.
I conclude by paying tribute to the work of my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) on ghost plates. It is a moment of pride to be named as a supporter of her Bill. She has done an extraordinary job in trying to fight an issue that goes across county lines in a rural constituency such as mine, which has a huge impact on safety and criminal activity. If the question is whether the DVLA is fit for purpose, I think my constituents would probably say no.
Sarah Green (Chesham and Amersham) (LD)
I welcome today’s debate and congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) on securing it.
I too wish to focus on the experience of those navigating the medical licence renewal process, but I begin by acknowledging that the DVLA is aware of its shortcomings in that area. When the chief executive Tim Moss appeared before the Public Accounts Committee in October last year, he was forthcoming and acknowledged that too many people wait too long for decisions on medical licence cases. He outlined a two-stage transformation programme: the migration to a new casework platform, completed in September, followed by a new medical services platform intended to digitise many of those transactions. He also confirmed that the new systems allow the DVLA to prioritise those who currently hold no licence. That is progress worth acknowledging, though Mr Moss also said that standards were
“nowhere near where we want to be”.
One of my constituents is a retired GP with 30 years in practice. He is familiar with DVLA regulations and processes. He suffered a cardiac arrest last summer, informed the DVLA immediately and has not driven since. He calculated that he would be legally permitted to drive again on 7 February and submitted his application, along with a detailed covering letter setting out all the relevant medical facts, eight weeks before that date, exactly as instructed. Ten days before his expected return to driving, neither his GP nor his specialist had received any inquiry from the DVLA medical department, so he called the dedicated medical helpline and was told, “Your application is being processed.” He is a retired doctor—he knew that could not be true. An application cannot be processed without the DVLA contacting his GP or specialist to verify the medical facts. His form had been sitting untouched for weeks on end. The helpline, rather than providing accurate information, was providing cover for a backlog.
What makes this case notable is that my constituent spent 30 years navigating medical bureaucracy on behalf of patients, and even he could not get a straight answer or any meaningful progress from the DVLA. He put it plainly to me in his letter, saying that the helpline uses a “smokescreen” to disguise the backlog of what appears to be a chronically under-resourced department. I think that that is a fair characterisation and that Mr Moss would not entirely disagree.
I return to the question of transformation. The new casework platform, the forthcoming medical services digital platform and the commitment to prioritise those without a licence are welcome, but a system migration does not fix the underlying problem if the staffing and processes within that system remain inadequate.
I have three specific asks of the Minister on medical licences. The first is about transparency. The DVLA helpline must be able to tell applicants the truth about where their case stands. “Your application is being processed” is not an acceptable response when no processing is taking place. Applicants deserve accurate information. If it will take months, they should be told, so that they can plan accordingly. The second relates to parallel inquiries. The DVLA initiates inquiries to GPs and specialists sometimes late and, far too often, one at a time. A properly designed system would identify all necessary medical inquiries at the point of application and dispatch them all at the same time. That single change could reduce waiting times significantly without additional resource.
My third question relates to a formal fast-track process for cases where the medical picture is clear. Mr Moss acknowledged when he was in front of the Committee that some cases are straightforward and resolved in days while others are genuinely complex. The system should reflect that distinction formally. Where specialists have already provided clear sign-off, those cases should not be sitting in the same queue as the most complex clinical decisions.
In his evidence, Mr Moss told the Public Accounts Committee that the DVLA understands the impact these delays have on people’s lives. The impact on my constituent is that he is sitting at home unable to drive, being told that his application is being processed when it is not. I urge the Minister to ensure that the transformation programme at the DVLA delivers not just new technology but genuinely improved standards of service.
Gerald Jones (Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare) (Lab)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) on securing the debate and the Backbench Business Committee for granting it.
As we have heard, the DVLA covers important aspects of work overseeing driving licences and people’s ability to drive safely. I pay tribute, as others have done, to the DVLA staff working to support my constituents. However, I also want to highlight some of the issues raised by a large number of my constituents over quite a period of time, which I know are similar to concerns raised by other hon. Members.
One of the most common issues relates to—surprise, surprise—medical applications, which we have heard time and again this afternoon. The crux of the issue seems to be that the system is paper-based and by post. Unfortunately, that adds further delays, not helped by issues with postal deliveries. There also seems to be a lack of co-ordination between the DVLA and clinicians.
Constituents have highlighted other concerns. No matter the outcome after their applications have been processed, there are significant delays in returning documents and, in some cases, licences, as well as delays in issuing medical letters. Six to seven months seems to be the average for cases that do not appear overly complex, but in the worst cases that I have dealt with, returns have taken in excess of seven months. It is clearly deeply unsatisfactory for things to take that long. As my hon. Friend the Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore) said, many more people try to navigate these issues on their own, so MPs do not see the full extent of the problem.
I was pleased that the Government increased the number of additional staff being recruited to support the DVLA’s medical team. That is a fairly new development, but we all look forward to seeing that investment in the workforce, which will, I hope, help to reduce waiting times for decisions. That will, in turn, reduce the frustration felt by my constituents and many others across the country.
The DVLA’s medical licensing system is, as we know, a vital service for our constituents. For too long, my constituents have had to put up with long and unexpected delays. I acknowledge that the Government have unfortunately inherited this and a number of other long-standing issues from the previous Government, and that they recognise that there is much work to do, but will my hon. Friend the Minister set out what more can be done? The length of time that my constituents and others are waiting, and the frustration and inconvenience that it causes them, is just too much for them to put up with. Many of the constituents who have contacted me are armed forces veterans, public servants and people who are doing the right thing, but unfortunately the system is letting them down. I hope that the Minister will address that in his winding-up speech.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) for securing a debate on this important topic, and the Backbench Business Committee for choosing it.
We have heard from many hon. Members the important reasons the DVLA needs to improve. I do not have time to mention all the excellent contributions, but I highlight that of the hon. Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore), who certainly need not have apologised for not using notes. In fact, the passion and authenticity of his speech show the rest of us that having fewer notes can often lead to much better contributions—alas, I have not managed to do that this afternoon.
We have heard lots of reasons why a well-functioning DVLA really matters, including safety culture, which is so important for everybody on our roads. Only if the DVLA works, and if people have faith in it, will we be able to encourage everybody to do the right thing in relation to medical conditions that any of us could develop and which could affect our ability to drive safely. Faith in public institutions, and in the accountability of institutions with which we have an obligation to comply, is important. It is all the more important in the light of the 70 years of societal change—encouraged by Government policy—that have made the car an essential and almost inevitable form of transport for most in our country.
The Government have rightly set out an ambitious road safety strategy that will impose additional duties and expectations on the DLVA, so we will need a better DVLA if that strategy is to succeed. Like other Members, I have had many constituents get in touch with me about issues that affect their ability to access jobs and contribute to the economy, and the personal independence their cars give them. I have constituents who have had very long, unexplained waits for licence renewal. That is often the real frustration: the accountability and the communication from the DVLA just are not there in many cases. Another constituent had a circular and extremely confusing communication merry-go-round between himself, the DVLA and medical personnel. He turned to me and my excellent casework team for help with how to emerge from that incredibly frustrating communication merry-go-round, because he did not know how to get out of it, despite his best efforts to engage with the process.
We are in the midst of a vehicle technological revolution. Driverless taxis are being piloted in London, and electric vehicles are now commonplace. As these changes are felt on our roads, we need to have confidence in the regulator responsible for managing them. We need a dynamic organisation ready to adapt to the challenges that these changes will bring. Unfortunately, the DVLA has not given us confidence that it will be up to the task, and that is not just based on constituents’ experience; the Public Accounts Committee, the National Audit Office and a November 2024 Cabinet Office review have all found it wanting.
The well-documented delays in medical driving licences show a system struggling to cope with demand. The 2023 Public Accounts Committee report found that over 3 million people had experienced long delays, with some losing employment and income as a result. Improvements have been made, with the average time to process medical licence cases being 44 days in 2024-25, down from 54 days the year before, but that is clearly still far too long. The DVLA is only facing more and more demands for its services, with an ageing population and the Government’s plan to introduce mandatory eye tests for over-70s. Without structural reform, this problem is not likely to improve any time soon.
Equally, the DVLA’s capacity to administer an increasingly complex and rapidly changing vehicle excise duty regime is a concern. The current VED system is already complex and opaque, given that cars, heavy goods vehicles and motorbikes are all calculated according to different metrics. Shortly after the transition in April 2025, when electric vehicles began paying VED, the DVLA acknowledged issues with V5C vehicle logbooks displaying incorrect tax information. That understandably raised concerns about the robustness of the agency’s data and systems.
At the 2025 Budget, the Government announced electric vehicle excise duty—eVED—a new tax payable alongside the existing VED from April 2028; there are far too many acronyms here, Madam Deputy Speaker. Given that electric vehicle registrations accounted for a record 19.6% market share in 2024, this will put further administrative pressure on a DVLA that is already making mistakes and struggling to cope with demand.
Finally, as driverless cars become more commonplace in the UK, the DVLA will play a central role in licensing, registration and data management for autonomous vehicles—a function for which the agency’s current legislative mandate and systems were not designed. The hon. Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) highlighted some of the existing problems with the administration of licence plates.
All these changes will place greater pressure on the agency, and confidence is low that it will be able to handle it, so the Government need to go faster in their reform of the DVLA. The 2024 report was a welcome start in identifying the structural problems. The Government now need to get on with the unglamorous but essential job of genuine and meaningful system reform, to ensure we have a regulator that is up to the job it faces. Although it is outside the scope of the debate, reform of the DVLA must go hand in hand with further reform of the DVSA to address the persistent backlog in practical driving tests. I look forward to the Minister’s comments.
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
I join everyone in congratulating the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) on securing the debate and on making a very important contribution, which has been supplemented by speech after speech right across the Chamber identifying a common theme around medical cases, as well as other issues. I will come on to those shortly.
The DVLA’s role in upholding the licensing system is essential for maintaining driver safety—that is a truism—and ensuring that the correct people are behind the wheel. We should not underestimate the scale of the task; it is a huge one. Last year, the agency collected £8.4 billion of vehicle excise duty for the Exchequer. It maintained 53 million driver records, as well as 47 million vehicle records, and it processed getting on for 100 million customer transactions. That is no mean feat. If we want to keep our country moving, it is vital that the DVLA processes its work efficiently, reaching the correct answers and doing so quickly.
The huge disruption caused by the covid pandemic saw the operation creak and exposed its weaknesses, with systems unable to cope with, among other things, staff distancing. Thanks to important work under the last Government, backlogs were brought down and longer-term efficiency improvements began to be implemented. Changes were made to streamline existing processes. For example, the law was altered to enable healthcare professionals other than doctors to respond to DVLA medical questionnaires. My right hon. Friend the Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden), when he was a Minister in the Department—he is now the shadow Secretary of State for Transport—launched an independent examination of the DVLA in 2023 to establish what the Government could do to provide genuinely customer-focused services. We had hoped that that reform process would continue with the new Administration after the election in 2024, and some of it has, but as we have heard in the debate today, the data suggests that in many instances that reforming zeal has not continued.
The DVLA’s business plan tells us that the average waiting time for licensing decisions on medical cases will be within 50 days—a long time in its own right. However, the Government now admit that in October 2025 the waiting time was over 78 days. By November, the delay had increased further to over 80 days. That has real consequences. We have heard that from Member after Member, and I shall pick out one. The hon. Member for Guildford (Zöe Franklin), in a powerful speech, referred to a constituent who has stage 4 cancer and has been waiting nine months and counting for a decision. That is totally unacceptable. Across 2025-26 the overall average was over 56 days, missing the Government’s already slack target of 50 days. That is not acceptable, because it leaves drivers hanging, uncertain of what their fate will be. I would greatly appreciate it if the Minister could explain whether the position has improved since November last year—the last date for which figures are publicly available. Have the Government met, or are they closer to meeting, the target?
The DVLA has said that it is completing the migration of its digital driver licensing services from its old digital platform on to a new strategic cloud platform. While that is welcome progress, it does not appear to align with the scale of the reform programme set out by the Treasury in its 2025 departmental efficiency plans. The Department for Transport plan listed:
“AI initiatives to increase automation and self-service at its contact centre”,
“expanding the use of Robotic Process Automation software”,
“automating Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) refunds”,
and
“wider organisational and workforce restructure.”
It claimed that, taken together, those changes would secure net efficiencies of £39 million by 2028-29.
However, the actual business plan from the Department for 2025-26, published in March, makes no mention of AI initiatives to bring forward automation and self-service, or to automate refunds for customers. What happened to the plans? Has the Minister changed his mind? Has he told the Treasury? Will he tell us? Without that focus in the business plan, how can we ever expect to see improvements in efficiency and service for the customer?
Those are not the only reforms that the DVLA is struggling with. There are challenges around fee deficits. The Government have promised efficiency savings, but it is not clear how they plan to deliver them. The shadow Transport Secretary asked about the £2.50 fee charged for the release of vehicle keeper details. Unfortunately and ironically, the Department’s written answers were later acknowledged to be partially incorrect, as they included inaccurate information about the requirement for legislation. Will the Minister take this opportunity—I am sure he will—to explain whether he plans to change those fees and, crucially, whether he is confident that he can make those changes effectively, given that he was unable to provide accurate information on the process in the first place? When there are questions about efficiency savings, it appears that there is a gap between the rhetoric and the actual delivery.
Cloned number plates are another problem of increasing concern that must be tackled, as was highlighted effectively by the hon. Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes). The DVLA has to be supported in its work with the police to crack down on the issue. In her important speech, she referenced the example of a manufacturer who had been caught and received a £5,000 fine and a non-permanent ban—a five-year ban, from memory—from the registration list at the DVLA. That is madness and she is absolutely right to highlight the issue.
We have to tackle the supply and use of cloned plates. Current legislation does not properly reflect the seriousness of the crime. The Conservative party is proposing new legislation so that manufacturers and online retailers of cloned plates would face a fine of up to £1,000 and/or up to five years’ imprisonment. On top of that, any driver caught using a plate that does not match their vehicle’s registered data would incur a driving ban of up to two years, up to a year in prison and a £5,000 fine. These are not accidental infringements of driving laws; it is express criminal activity, often to facilitate other crimes, and it should be treated as such.
Ultimately, we need to have laws in place that clamp down on criminality. It is an oddity that it is much harder to scrap a car than it is to buy one. To scrap a car, people need ID, a vehicle licence and a UK bank account, whereas to buy one they can just turn up and pay in cash. That is a gateway for thousands of uninsured vehicles to be used for criminal purposes. The different approaches make no sense. Why do we not tighten up the rules, so that if a person wants to buy a car, at the very least they have to record their driving licence? Will the Government consider working with the DVLA to support our proposal to tighten up that method of removing uninsured vehicles from the road?
The DVLA is ripe for further reform. Its services our ideal for use of AI to improve productivity, reduce costs and improve responsiveness. Instead of being paralysed by the Mandelson affair, the Government need to focus on driving through reforms to serve the driving public and clamp down on vehicle-related crime. I am concerned that the current data appears to be going in the wrong direction, but there is still time for the Government to turn this around. We have a plan for improvements and I look forward to hearing that the Government have one too.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to this debate on the reform of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. I appreciate the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) securing the debate and the Backbench Business Committee facilitating it.
The DVLA touches almost every household in the United Kingdom. It is one of the most advanced and large-scale digital organisations in Government, handling billions of interactions each year. Over 84% of transactions are now completed online and the system works well for most drivers. A standard non-medical driving licence application is typically processed in just two to three days, which demonstrates what a modern public service can achieve at scale. However, I want to focus on where the service has not worked well enough—in drivers’ medical services—and explain what it is being done to put that right.
Drivers’ medical services have been a source of significant concern for Members across the House and, more importantly, for our constituents. For many people, the ability to drive is essential. It supports independence, employment, caring responsibilities and access to healthcare. When a licence is delayed because of a medical investigation, the impact is immediate and personal. People can face lost income, isolation, missed appointments and prolonged uncertainty.
The Government are clear that the service levels in the drivers’ medical services have fallen below expectations for far too many drivers who are waiting for a licensing decision, often, as has been pointed out numerous times during the debate, after doing everything they have been asked to do. I am not going to stand at the Dispatch Box and make excuses or point at the previous Administration for the mess that we inherited, but I am going to say that I am sorry. I am sorry to all those who have been impacted by the delays. We are going to put things right—we are putting things right. Peoples’ frustration is justified, and it deserves both explanation and action.
It is important to understand the scale and complexity of the challenge. Demand for medical licensing decisions has risen sharply and consistently. In 2024 to 2025 alone, the DVLA made more than 830,000 medical licensing decisions, the vast majority of which did not involve MPs, and nor should they have to. Demand continues to rise, driven in part by an ageing population who quite rightfully wish to remain mobile and independent for longer.
As has been pointed out, not all medical cases are the same. Many straightforward cases such as those notified online for well controlled diabetes can be resolved quickly—sometimes within days—but an increasing proportion are complex and require detailed clinical evidence from NHS professionals or specialist reports and examinations, all of which, I will add, should be paid for by the DVLA. Those decisions cannot be rushed. The DVLA’s overriding duty is to protect road safety, and every decision must be based on sound medical advice.
That evidence is informed by six independent medical advisory panels covering key conditions that affect safe driving, including cardiovascular, neurological, psychiatric and visual disorders. The expert panels ensure that decisions reflect modern clinical practice and support the introduction of new treatments. A good example is the recent change allowing drivers with diabetes to use continuous glucose monitoring, removing a significant burden for drivers while improving efficiency.
Despite the dedication of DVLA staff, at times demand has exceeded capacity. That pressure was compounded by the need to replace a legacy IT system. Introducing a modern casework system was essential, but it required investment, experienced staff input and training. In the short term, that has contributed to longer decision times, which rose to 71 working days, alongside increased complaints, call volumes and, of course, correspondence from hon. Members. What matters now is progress, and progress is being made.
Since September 2025, all new and renewed medical cases have been processed through a single modern digital casework system. Legacy cases have also been migrated, meaning that all driver medical teams are now working in one digital environment.
On 31 March, the DVLA launched its new digital medical services platform, which allows far more drivers to notify conditions, apply for new licences and renew licences online. It reduces errors, improves accuracy and enables staff to focus on the most complex cases. Initial case actions can now be taken within 24 hours. Staff are supported by decision-tree logic, and customers can be contacted by email, reducing uncertainty and ensuring that communication is flowing. On the email point, some sections of the law stipulate that communication must still be done in writing. The system will continue to be developed. Further automation of letters and medical questionnaires is planned, and more customers will be brought on to the platform over time, driving further efficiency.
Alongside digital reform, the DVLA has also increased staffing capacity. An additional 43 medical caseworkers are already in training, with a further 22 joining shortly. The steps that we are taking are already delivering results. So far in April, the average time to make a licensing decision in medical cases is 56.6 working days, which is a significant reduction from 71.4 days in February.
The DVLA will continue to prioritise cases where drivers need their licence for work or other urgent purposes. Hon. Members may also be aware that in many cases drivers are legally able to continue to drive while applications are being processed—when it is safe for them to do so—under section 88 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, as has been mentioned. While the delays in the return of those licences, as raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Erewash (Adam Thompson), should not be happening, drivers should be covered by that section 88 ability. However, I am happy to pick up specific cases for my hon. Friend and other hon. Members in the Chamber.
Some delays remain unavoidable, particularly when information from healthcare professionals is outstanding. The DVLA issues automated reminders, but safe licensing decisions depend on adequate medical input. That is why the DVLA is also working with the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology through the CustomerFirst programme, which is exploring further reforms to the drivers’ medical processes, including secure digital links with the NHS.
Those changes sit within a wider transformation of the DVLA. The new driver and vehicles account allows motorists to manage their details digitally and to self-serve more easily. By 2030, the DVLA intends to operate as an even more digital insight-led organisation that is faster, fairer and more consistent, while retaining safeguards for vulnerable drivers. No one underestimates the impact that the delays have had, but it is right to acknowledge that real action is under way and that real progress is now being delivered.
Every life lost on our roads is a tragedy. Younger drivers are disproportionately involved in serious road collisions. Drivers aged 17 to 24 make up just 6% of licence holders, yet they are involved in nearly a quarter of all fatal and serious collisions. Those figures are stark and demand action. That is why the Government’s road safety strategy includes a consultation on minimum learning periods before a learner driver can take their practical test, which would allow learners greater exposure to various conditions, such as driving in poor weather, at night or in heavier traffic, helping them to develop essential skills and judgment while preserving the freedoms that come with passing a test. We are also consulting on lowering the drink-drive limit for newly qualified drivers, alongside continued investment in the THINK! campaign, which targets those most at risk—particularly young men—by focusing on speeding and drink-driving.
Road safety is not only about young drivers, though; everyone deserves to feel safe on our roads, including older drivers and families. Around 24% of the drivers killed in 2024 were aged 70 or over. Although many older people drive safely well into later life, it is right to address risks linked to eyesight and cognitive change. That is why we are consulting on mandatory eye testing for drivers aged 70 and over, and developing options for cognitive testing, recognising that fitness to drive is about capability, not age. I encourage Members to ensure that their constituents engage with the consultation that is under way.
I will pick up on the point that the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) made about optometrists. They are able to inform the DVLA of a medical condition, including eyesight issues, if a patient cannot or will not do so. It is important to point that out.
I turn to the growing concern around ghost plates and other non-compliant number plates, which my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) mentioned and which undermine road safety and enforcement. Let me be clear: it is already illegal to sell or display ghost or non-compliant number plates. Only DVLA-approved registered number plate suppliers may supply plates, and they must meet strict standards and keep records. Drivers who use illegal plates can face fines of up to £1,000.
Jerome Mayhew
This is not a party political point, because I am sure that blame could be focused on my party as well. Given that we have 34,000 registered suppliers, does the Minister recognise that it is an impossible task for the DVLA to keep any kind of meaningful record as to whether they are in fact compliant?
Simon Lightwood
I will address that point in a moment.
Enforcement at the roadside is a matter for the police. Supported by the DVLA, enforcement officers are working closely with trading standards to tackle illegal supply, so the Government are not standing still. We are working with policing partners to strengthen enforcement, including by funding the roads policing innovation programme. We are reviewing the registered number plate supplier scheme, considering a new British standard for plates and exploring how technology can identify illegal plates more effectively. We also understand the importance of accurate records. Although the vast majority of vehicle records held by the DVLA have up-to-date and traceable registered keepers, we are always looking at ways to improve their accuracy.
Drivers deserve timely and safe decisions, staff deserve modern systems that support their professional judgment, and the public deserve to have confidence that safety and fairness remain at the heart of our licensing system. Acknowledging where services have fallen short matters, but so does recognising the progress that has been made. I commend these efforts to the House.
Vikki Slade
I thank the many Members who have spoken in today’s debate, and the shadow Minister and Minister for their comments. I am glad that the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee, the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman), is here, because I can thank him again for allowing this debate—I think that is about the fifth time that has been mentioned.
I hope that everyone whose case has been mentioned today gets their licence back very soon and that MPs can reduce the size of their inboxes and get on with doing the job we were sent here to do and not just be additional caseworkers. However, I must pay tribute to all the caseworkers in all our offices, who are doing the bulk of this work and helping our constituents. In particular, I thank my fantastic team, led by Emily.
The DVLA relies on trust and accountability, and it is there for safety. I thank the Minister for his apology. It is rare that we get a straightforward “sorry” from a Government Minister, so that is very welcome. Given what he said, I am hopeful that we can all look forward to a much more efficient system as we come to renew our licences.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered reform of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency.
Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023
(1 day, 12 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
I rise to speak about an issue that goes to the very heart of the responsibilities we have as parliamentarians: namely, the duty to protect the most vulnerable people in our society from exploitation, neglect and harm.
In 2016, I had the honour of being drawn in the private Members’ Bills ballot. I sat on the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee for some 14 years prior to the last general election, and at the time we were conducting an inquiry into homelessness in England. I was shocked by the treatment that single homeless people received from local authorities and the public sector in general, so I had the privilege of sponsoring the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017—it took 18 months to be enacted—to transform how we prevent and respond to homelessness in this country. It was built on the very simple but powerful principle that early intervention, dignity and support can change lives. To date, my Act has prevented 1.6 million people from becoming homeless.
In 2022, the Committee undertook an inquiry, at the behest of several Birmingham MPs, into what can only be described as the wild west situation in supported housing in Birmingham. When we went there, we were shocked: we saw whole streets where rogue landlords had bought up three-bedroom houses, extended them to the side, to the rear and upwards, and converted them into eight single-room properties, with a small shared kitchen and bathroom.
More shocking than that was the fact that these landlords were not providing any support whatsoever to the vulnerable people living in their properties. These houses could have housed someone who had been a drug addict next door to a drug pusher, and a lady fleeing domestic violence next door to someone convicted of domestic violence. There was no regulation at all. To be fair to it, Birmingham city council had introduced a voluntary scheme, but unfortunately the rogue landlords were the ones who would not register. Before I go on, it is very important that I pay tribute to the wonderful charities up and down the country that provide not only a home, but support for vulnerable people.
Having been drawn in the private Members’ Bills ballot in 2022, I took the step of introducing what is now the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023. This House and the other place took vital steps when they supported the Act. I worked with charities such as Crisis, and the Act was born out of necessity, with mounting evidence in too many cases that supported housing was failing the very people it was meant to help and that rogue landlords were getting away without proper regulation.
I think it is fair to say that I have been patient, given that the Act was passed in 2023 and, in 2026, it still has not been brought into operation. I know that the Government have consulted on it, and I welcome the fact that they continue to commit to implementing it, as they set out in their recent response to the consultation, but the time for consultation and delay must now be over. We have to get on with this, because every single day, vulnerable people are being exploited by rogue landlords. The need for action is urgent and immediate, because while we continue to talk about the issue, rogue landlords continue to operate. While we delay, vulnerable people continue to suffer and public money continues to flow into the hands of those who exploit those in need, rather than support them.
Supported housing should be one of the great strengths of our social system. It provides accommodation alongside care, support and supervision for people who are literally rebuilding their lives. Let us not forget that these people may have experienced homelessness, may have fled domestic abuse, or may be living with complex needs. The good charities assess those people’s needs just after providing a roof over their heads and supply a network of support; the rogue landlords pop along once a week and say, “Everyone all right? Yes? See you next week.” That is the extent of the support that these people receive.
As Crisis has set out, when it is delivered well, supported housing can provide high-quality transitional homes that help people to move on from homelessness and rebuild their independence. Emmaus UK’s recent “Rebuilding Lives” report reinforces this, showing how good supported housing not only offers shelter, but provides purpose and opportunities for training and work, which are key ingredients in helping people to regain stability and confidence.
When it works well, supported housing is transformative. It provides a pathway to independence and access to employment, it helps people to rebuild relationships and move on to settled homes, and it saves the public purse billions by reducing demand on health, criminal justice and emergency services. However, when it fails and rogue landlords take control, we have seen individuals punished for daring to get a job, because if they do so, they lose their housing benefit and the landlord cannot charge the earth in rent. Those rogue landlords refuse to provide even basic support and, as I have said, they sometimes house people literally next door to the very people they are fleeing.
Over recent years, we have seen the rise of rogue operators in the exempt accommodation sector. Crisis has documented how those providers exploit gaps in regulation, particularly in non-commissioned accommodation, where oversight is at its weakest. They have entered the market not to deliver support, but to maximise profit. That is because exempt accommodation allows providers to charge higher rents through housing benefit, recognising that supporting vulnerable people comes with additional costs. The fundamental flaw, as Crisis has highlighted, is that there has been no consistent, enforceable mechanism to ensure that the support justifying those higher rents is delivered, and there is no single regulator responsible for overseeing that support. The result is that in some cases, we are rewarding exploitation.
We have heard deeply troubling accounts from residents. Crisis has reported people being forced to share basic facilities with literally dozens of others, living in properties that are plagued by damp, mould and vermin, and experiencing intimidation and abuse—I have spoken to tenants who were abused and forced to move from one property to another. Some have even been forced back into homelessness to escape these conditions. Others have been charged additional fees for support that does not exist—charges that eat into their already limited incomes and push them further into poverty. Heaven help those vulnerable people if they dare to get a job, because the reduction in housing support means that, in most cases, the rogue landlord kicks them out. These findings are echoed in wider evidence from the sector, including the collapse of providers such as Prospect Housing, where residents were charged for inadequate or absent support.
To be absolutely clear, this is not an isolated problem. While I remember visiting cities such as Birmingham where the issues with supported housing have been most prominent, Crisis and other organisations have identified similar patterns across London, the midlands, the south-east and beyond. Rogue providers are expanding, exploiting inconsistencies in oversight between local authorities and adapting their business models to stay one step ahead of enforcement.
Local authorities are responsible for assessing eligibility for housing benefit and verifying that support is being provided, but as Crisis has highlighted, they face significant barriers of limited resources, inconsistent powers and legal constraints. There is also evidence that some councils struggle to proactively verify whether meaningful support is being delivered at all. Other regulators exist, but none has comprehensive responsibility for the support element of exempt accommodation. Guidance such as the national statement of expectations sets out a vision, but it is not legally enforceable. Voluntary standards exist in some areas, but compliance is optional. In short, the system has allowed far too many providers to slip through the cracks.
Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)
The hon. Member is making an excellent speech, and I want to reiterate his point. I have an extraordinary situation in Worcestershire, where many of my housing officers are not in the borough or even in the region that they serve. I find it extraordinary that I get regular interventions from the police telling me where supported housing has cropped up in my own patch, and yet my housing teams do not even know that it exists in the local authority area. Is it any surprise that the people there are often living in squalor—to the extent that some of my most vulnerable residents have chosen to live in tents in parks, rather than be in that supported accommodation?
Bob Blackman
I thank the hon. Member for that intervention. Clearly, if people are living in tents or are homeless on the streets, they are not getting the support they need to rebuild their lives, which is the key.
I introduced the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 to provide the framework we need to bring order, accountability and integrity to the sector. The Act enables the introduction of national supported housing standards—clear benchmarks for what good provision looks like, covering both accommodation and support. It establishes a licensing regime, empowering local authorities to approve, monitor and, where necessary, shut down providers that fail to meet the standards. The Act requires councils to develop local strategies, ensuring that supported housing provision is aligned with genuine local need, rather than driven by profit. That issue has been highlighted by Crisis and Emmaus UK research. Crucially, the Act allows for the linking of enhanced housing benefit to compliance, ensuring that public money supports only those providers that meet the required standards. The reality is that the system is costing the taxpayer a fortune, and it is going to rogue landlords.
The Government’s recent response to the consultation provides much-needed further detail on how the measures will be implemented, and I welcome the commitment to a national licensing system, the introduction of national supported housing standards and the application of a fit and proper person test for those managing schemes. I hope that we can ensure that some of the weasel ways that some rogue landlords use to get around things can be corrected. These are supposed to be not-for-profit organisations, but often a person will buy a property and rent it to a registered charity, which then pays rent to the landlord. Although the charity is not making a profit, the owner of the property is making a fortune. I hope we can correct that particular area.
I also welcome the decision, strongly supported by Crisis, to make eligibility for enhanced housing benefit contingent on a scheme holding a licence. That gives the system real teeth, removing the financial incentive that has driven rogue providers into the market, but I must express my concern about the timeline. The Government have indicated that implementation will begin in April 2027, four years after my Act received Royal Assent. I welcome the commitment, but we have pointed out that there must be no further delay, given the scale of harm that has already been caused since the Act was passed. During that time, the harms we sought to address have escalated. We must continue to ensure that these people do not continue their profit making. Every month of delay allows rogue landlords to operate unchecked. Every delay means more vulnerable people placed in unsafe conditions. Every delay represents a failure to deliver on the promise we made on a cross-party basis in this House. We must ask ourselves: how many more people will suffer before these powers are brought into force?
We must also recognise that regulation alone is not enough. The problem in this sector has been exacerbated by years of under-investment in support services. Crisis has made it clear that the growth of poor-quality, non-commissioned provision is closely linked to the decline in funding for support and the absence of a dedicated national funding stream. Housing benefit can cover higher rents, but it cannot fund support services. That creates a perverse incentive, in that providers must house people with support needs to qualify for higher payments, but there is no dedicated funding to meet those needs. Some providers go to great lengths to bridge this gap, relying on charitable funding or volunteers. That has been highlighted by Emmaus, and its model demonstrates the value of meaningful activity, work and community. Others, however, pass the costs on to the residents, charging additional fees that push people further into poverty. If we are serious about making this system work, we must address that imbalance.
The Treasury’s ongoing review of homelessness spending presents an opportunity to align funding with the new regulatory framework. As Crisis has argued, this must include a reset and an increase in funding for support services, including approaches such as Housing First and floating support. I urge the Government—they have not only a majority on their side, but support across the House on this issue—to really get on and do it.
We must ensure that local authorities have the resources they need to implement licensing and enforcement, the new burdens placed on councils must be fully funded if the system is to succeed, and we must ensure that, as we tackle rogue provision, we do not inadvertently increase homelessness. The Government’s commitment to produce guidance on rehousing residents affected by scheme closures is welcome, but I would caution that guidance alone is not enough. Local authorities must be supported financially and strategically to prevent homelessness and to take a proactive, co-ordinated approach.
We must also listen to those with lived experience. Evidence from residents, including the testimonies gathered by Emmaus, consistently shows that good supported housing is about more than accommodation. It is about meaningful support, opportunities for training, work and a sense of community and belonging. It is about rebuilding lives. We must ensure that these voices are at the heart of the new system shaping national standards, informing local strategies and holding providers to account. Ultimately, that is what this Act is about: it is about people—people who have already faced significant hardship and who deserve better from us.
The Act represents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reset the system, drive out rogue landlords, raise standards and ensure that supported housing truly supports those in need. We should just look at the success of my first Act—the Homelessness Reduction Act—which, I say again, has prevented 1.6 million people from being made homeless. That is why we must implement the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act, and we must do so with urgency.
In closing, I ask the Government simply to bring forward the regulations and the guidance, ensure that the April 2027 timetable is met without further delay, provide the resources needed for effective implementation, and ensure that no further delays stand in the way of protecting vulnerable people. Let us honour the intent of this House, let us deliver on the promise we made in 2023, and let us never again allow vulnerable people to be treated as commodities in a broken system. The time for action is now. I look forward to the Minister’s response.
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore) for his contribution, and the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) for bringing forward this debate. His speech reflected his extensive experience in this area, and he relayed to the House some of the success his legislation has already had.
I want to start by saying, in response to the hon. Gentleman’s points at the end about what he is asking the Government to do and his summary of the next steps, that I wholeheartedly agree with him. I hope that anybody listening to this debate who has an interest in this area will understand the very clear cross-party support for this action. We waste far too much time in this place in disagreement, but with such issues, on which there is significant cross-party agreement, I hope everyone understands that we are going to crack on with it, because it is important for all the reasons he has mentioned.
I pay tribute to Crisis and Emmaus for their work, which the hon. Gentleman also mentioned, and for the attention they have brought to this issue. I hope he will see that spirit of prevention running through our homelessness strategy, which we published in December. The best homelessness policies are the ones that stop the trauma before it begins.
The Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 is an important piece of legislation. It was introduced because supported housing can play a vital role, often providing stability and support for some of the most vulnerable people in our communities. Where delivered well, it offers safe accommodation to help people live with dignity. However, the House has heard worrying examples of where the system has not worked at all as it should: poor-quality accommodation, weak oversight and vulnerable residents badly let down. That is why the 2023 Act matters. It provides the basis for strong oversight, clear standards and better protection.
Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for giving way. I pay tribute to the work of the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) and the organisations he mentioned. I, too, hear stories in my constituency of people who have been evicted from their supported housing when they have gone on to get work. They should be good news stories, but instead those people find it extremely difficult to get accommodation with other landlords. They cannot get a reference from the previous landlord, because they were kicked out for not paying over-inflated rents. It really is high time that this Government, with our values, does something about that appalling situation.
Alison McGovern
I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. The trigger points she mentions, which can inadvertently exacerbate homelessness, are exactly the point of the duty to collaborate that we have brought forward in the homelessness strategy. We will be working on the exact point she mentions.
It is important to get the detail right. There is, rightly, broad support for improving standards in supported housing. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the consultation response that the Government published this month. We need to ensure that the framework we put in place is workable, proportionate and fair. Regulation will target poor practice, without creating unnecessary burdens for the many responsible providers who are delivering good-quality support every day. Across the country, there are providers doing excellent work. Housing associations, charities, local organisations and others are operating high-quality supported housing for those who need it most. That is why we will drive out the very poor practice, while supporting and protecting good providers.
The Government are committed not just to the aims of the Act, but to implementing it in a way that works on the ground. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the Treasury’s value for money review. That is a very important element of this work. We are wasting taxpayers’ money for very poor outcomes. None of us can tolerate that, so Ministers are working together on that value for money review.
We have established the supported housing advisory panel to bring together expertise from across the sector and inform how the Act is implemented. Just this morning I met the chair, Sir David Pearson. I am confident that under his leadership the panel will provide insight and challenge as a critical friend, as we reform supported housing. I have also asked him to meet parliamentarians to brief them directly.
We have also published guidance to support local authorities in developing their supported housing strategies, which will help them identify and respond to need in their area. Alongside that, we have provided funding to local authorities to support the development of those strategies. That work is now under way in many areas.
This is not the end of that support. Further funding will follow to help authorities move to the next stage, including the set-up of licensing schemes. These are important steps. I have heard very clearly what the hon. Gentleman said on the length of time between the legislation being enacted and its provisions being felt on the ground. I have a lot of sympathy with his point. I am trying to help, and I know that if I do not, and if there is a delay, I will be asked many times about it at this Dispatch Box, so it is in all our interests to get on with it.
The effectiveness of this Act will depend on the regulations, the support standards and the way the powers are used. That means continuing to work carefully through the detail, listening to residents, providers and local authorities, and ensuring that the final framework delivers the improvements that residents badly need. As I have said, we are also making sure that, in raising standards, we preserve the good that already exists and, in fact, shine a light on it.
We do not want to undermine the providers that are already doing the right thing with supported housing; we want to strengthen the system so that people can continue to work with confidence, while poor providers and those who are bringing about these terrible circumstances are no longer able to exploit the system. I think that is the right approach. It is the way to protect residents, improve quality and maintain a supported housing sector that meets the needs of the people who need it most. As part of that approach, we will soon consult on the actual draft regulations.
We are committed to the purpose of the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act and recognise its importance and how impactful it will be when its provisions are finally in full force. I thank hon. Members again for their contributions.
Bob Blackman
I thank the Minister for the response she has given thus far. I am not going to get into the politics of this, but local government reorganisation is going on, so could she say a little about what will happen to ensure that local government sets up in the right sort of way with the licensing scheme?
Alison McGovern
There is a response to that in the consultation response that we published recently. I am very conscious of all the potential effects of local government reorganisation. I think the creation of unitary councils is the right thing to do, because the splitting of functions can make tackling homelessness and bringing the Act into force harder than it needs to be. However, I am conscious that this will be a period of transition and that the areas undergoing reorganisation need particular attention in relation to this matter, so I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising that—we have it on our agenda.
I thank the hon. Gentleman for all the work he has done to keep attention focused on this issue. It has been very good to work with him so far on it, and I look forward to working with him even more in the near future. We need to make progress on this, and I am determined that we will do so.
Question put and agreed to.