Westminster Hall
Wednesday 14th October 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 1 day, 17 hours ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
09:30
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
This House has considered government support for the situation in Nepal. I'm grateful for the opportunity for today's debate and to discuss the government's response to the recent terrible floods in Nepal. And I hope that the debate will be an important opportunity to demonstrate the strong links between Britain and Nepal, and to understand more about the response to these dreadful floods. I also want to ask the Minister for an update on the response and on Britain's continuing support for the longer term reconstruction of the affected area and for the development of Nepal more broadly.
I would like to start by echoing the PM's words on Nepal and on the disaster. It is quite clear, miss McVeigh, that Nepal has always been there for Britain. Now Britain needs to be there for Nepal. And as everybody here will remember, we have a very strong and indeed some would say special relationship with Nepal, which goes back over 200 years. The Gurkhas have served in the British Army throughout the 19th century in World War One, World War Two and numerous other conflicts since .
The two wars, including Malaysia, Brunei, the Falklands and Afghanistan. More recently, Gurkha soldiers were deployed to deal with the civil emergency in South Wales, where they help tackle very serious wildfires this summer. I do also want to acknowledge and and and celebrate the very significant civil contribution of the British Nepalese community, most notably in my own community and others around the country, where a number of British Nepalese residents work in the NHS, work in our local transport system, work in small businesses, in it, and in many, many other walks of life.
And there is an enormous pride in that connection in reading and across the country, in the areas where there are significant Gurkha communities and Nepalese communities. And there is also a great deal of support and concern about the situation in Nepal. So with that, with those points, I would like to now turn to the floods themselves. And first of all, Mr. McVeigh, I would like to offer my deepest condolences to all those who were affected, both both the families who lost loved ones and those whose loved ones are still missing.
This was a truly awful disaster which affected thousands and thousands of people. I understand the latest estimates are that around 1400 people lost their lives, and that 5000 are still missing. The images are very difficult to describe. As one of my colleagues on Reading Borough Council. Pratiksha Gurung, who's a local councillor who's from Nepal, originally said to me at the time it was so awful that people could simply not watch the news.
They couldn't watch their televisions because of the horrors that were unfolding. And we can all remember that some of the images ourselves. And I would just like to say that our hearts go out to all of those who are involved, both families who lost loved ones and families whose loved ones are still missing. Miss McVeigh. The floods have left grieving families, orphans and lost family members. And sadly, there were several families in my own community in reading, both in my constituency and in neighbouring constituencies, where families lost loved ones.
There's also been a terrible effect on the very large British Nepalese community in Aldershot, and I would like to offer my condolences to all the communities around the country, and I understand many of my colleagues will want to speak about their own communities or just offer their support more generally, and I would like to pay tribute to the work of members from other seats, including my colleagues from the two reading seats from Aldershot, Bracknell, Basingstoke, Oxford, West London and many others.
Many weren't able to to attend today but wanted to offer their support. Could I? Miss McVeigh also thank the Nepalese armed forces, emergency services, emergency workers, medical staff and many others who led the rescue operation in August and early September, and also their international colleagues, including British personnel. They serve with distinction and many of them are continuing to serve now in the difficult aftermath of the disaster. And I should say, I'm also very proud of the links between Britain and Nepal and the support offered by the British government, by charities in Britain and by local communities.
And I'm looking forward to the minister updating the House later on. Much of this. I would like to particularly pay tribute to the help offered by our armed services and by the Foreign Office in the immediate aftermath, and I understand from briefings that I've had with ministers that there was incredibly close working between British and Nepalese forces at the time, and that a range of technical help, as well as financial support, was offered to deal with some very specific issues.
The Fcdo, as is well known, offered a £5 million fund for immediate support and they also increased consular assistance, bringing in extra staff into the embassy in Kathmandu. I would like to thank the government for this prompt response and for the continuing support Britain is offering to Nepal as the second biggest bilateral donor to the country. And I'd also like to mention and thank ministers for their support in Parliament. To myself and other members of the Nepal Appg.
Minister Doughty and Minister Winterton provided vital assistance with casework and with briefings on the fast moving situation. I would like to turn now to the work provided by and the support provided by charities. Dec has provided played an important role and I'm pleased to see the continuing work it is undertaking in Nepal. I also would like to mention Unicef, which provided some briefing to me and some support. And the work of the United Nations in this important.
In this important situation and more locally, I would like to pay tribute to the community groups, including the Greater Reading Nepalese Community Association and others around the country who provided such heartfelt and important support. I would like to mention a number of local residents, in particular Bhimsen Cader, who's the chair of the association in reading. Dev Budha, and his wife , Aruna Gurung Chandra, who's the head of the Forgotten British Gurkha charity, which provides important support to retired Gurkhas in our area, and Pratheeksha and Deepak Gurung Pratheeksha, a local councillor.
Ram Gilani, who's another worker with retired servicemen who works to support service personnel, and also Bipin Diwani, the chargé d'affaires at the Nepalese Embassy, who's been extremely helpful in providing, briefing and encouraging ongoing links between Britain and Nepal and those of us who have Nepalese communities. I would like to just give you an indication of what this felt like at the time, because it's worth understanding the sense of feeling, and I'm sure my colleagues will deal with this as well.
We had a spontaneous vigil in Reading town centre outside, outside our large Marks and Spencers store in Broad Street, which is the main shopping street in the town, and hundreds of people showed up. This is on a Sunday evening. It was organised by the Greater Reading Community Nepalese Community Association. However, there was huge support from people who were not from Nepal and from all walks of life and from across the town, and that was echoed across the country, from what I understand.
And that sense of support was incredible. The sense of, I should say, actually patriotism. Both Nepalese and British patriotism, the level of deep connection with the armed forces, the sense of solidarity between people was quite overwhelming and quite powerful practice for, for example, she's a local councillor. She had a resident who just turned up at her house randomly and saying to her, I would like to give you £50 towards this campaign because it's so, so important to me.
We had other people just stopping in the street when we had the vigil, just coming up to us, asking if they could light a candle, asking if they could show their support. And that level of support was very, very impressive and indeed overwhelming at the time. So I would like to thank all of those who helped, and that is continuing. And it's just developing and continuing. And my own office and other MPs offices have been quite active in working with local campaigners.
I want to pay particular tribute to English Martyrs School, local school in Reading and English Martyrs Church, who are one of many, many organisations who've offered their support. They're offering to do some fundraising through a sponsored walk that is typical of the kind of community based activity which is now underway, which will help support the very long term and much needed reconstruction, the help for the victims, but also the practical reconstruction of the country. So I would just like to to thank everyone for that.
Could I now, I do appreciate other colleagues need to address the issues in their communities. I would like to ask the minister a series of much more specific questions. I look forward to his answers on these. One of the biggest impacts, obviously, has been on families both in Britain and Nepal , and some of the casework is really very, very difficult for us to deal with as local MPs. And I can't go into individual cases. If I can just explain that.
It is really awful what's happened to so many families who have relatives, both in Britain and Nepal, people who are on pilgrimages to the lakes where the water came from, who are still missing in some cases. These are older people. In one case, in in reading, there's a gentleman who's retired Gurkha, who was on a pilgrimage. There are many others from, including from other British communities, many Hindus who attend pilgrimages to these sacred lakes. And it's worth considering the impact on families, both in the short term and the longer term, which is really, really serious.
I do look forward to the minister saying a little bit more about that. There's a very large number of people who are affected, something like 84,000 people, and I think it's around 32,000 children, some of whom are orphans. I was speaking to somebody earlier this week. Some of the orphans are being cared for in monasteries, in Buddhist monasteries in the area, some being cared for and put up in schools. There's still a very real practical implication of what's happened.
This is both a terrible human tragedy, but there are also ongoing practical need. There's an ongoing practical need for for development and for assistance in the area in what is a developing country, which is one of the the lower income countries in the world. There's also. So I would like to ask the Minister for an update on the humanitarian response and the ongoing work in the area, including work within the affected river system, the need to rebuild bridges, schools, homes, and to also provide a greater degree of resilience if these threats are now increasing because of climate change.
And in particular, I would like him to perhaps address some of the detail around the environmental issues and the long term concerns. There actually was another smaller flood this week in the Gorkha district. The Gandaki River flooded and a number of people are now missing. This was a mudslide, and a large amount of mud and rocks went into the river. It's not quite the same. However, it's happening obviously in the same geographical location, and there are great concerns within the British Nepalese community that this type of problem may and disaster may occur again.
And I do need to declare an interest as several members of my family are environmental scientists. My dad actually visited Nepal during a programme in the 1990s, where a number of countries were providing assistance to developing countries to try to provide greater resilience against natural disasters of this kind. I've also visited Nepal completely separately as a walker with my wife some years ago, so I should declare an interest in that sense. But I would particularly like the minister to address the particular risks in mountainous regions like Nepal with very, very steep river valleys, with high levels of rainfall, with glacial lakes and glaciers, which may now be melting, sadly , because of the climate emergency.
What the practical implications of this are how the UK and other advanced countries can provide greater resources to provide monitoring and early warning, and what measures can be taken to provide resilience, greater resilience for the communities involved, who obviously are very much now appear to be now far more at risk of the the potential threats of this type of disaster, or maybe a smaller scale disaster of this type happening again. So I would look forward to him answering those questions and more generally, to talk about the work that Britain is ongoing, the ongoing work Britain has with Nepal around encouraging its development.
I know Nepal had hoped to move out of a certain category of developing countries. It didn't quite make it, but it is developing. There is incredible potential as a new government, which is working very closely with our government. One of the first the first, in fact, official visit to the new government was made by a British minister, which is, I think, very important indication of the special relationship between our two countries. There's scope for greater trade and support as well.
There's a British Nepalese community which is very active across our country as well. So I do look forward to the minister's response. And if I may also ask him, I realise it's not his brief, if he could just contact his colleague in the Mod and ask for an update for the community on the unrelated issue of the pensions for a certain group of Gurkha soldiers, those who retired before 1997, who have a different pension arrangement to the more recent recruits and retirees.
So, miss McVeigh, thank you so much for the opportunity to speak today. I am really grateful to the speaker and to the House authorities for granting me the opportunity to to have this debate, and I look forward to hearing more from colleagues and indeed from the minister. And I look forward to to hearing the other responses. Thank you. Hear, hear.
I would like to start by echoing the PM's words on Nepal and on the disaster. It is quite clear, miss McVeigh, that Nepal has always been there for Britain. Now Britain needs to be there for Nepal. And as everybody here will remember, we have a very strong and indeed some would say special relationship with Nepal, which goes back over 200 years. The Gurkhas have served in the British Army throughout the 19th century in World War One, World War Two and numerous other conflicts since .
The two wars, including Malaysia, Brunei, the Falklands and Afghanistan. More recently, Gurkha soldiers were deployed to deal with the civil emergency in South Wales, where they help tackle very serious wildfires this summer. I do also want to acknowledge and and and celebrate the very significant civil contribution of the British Nepalese community, most notably in my own community and others around the country, where a number of British Nepalese residents work in the NHS, work in our local transport system, work in small businesses, in it, and in many, many other walks of life.
And there is an enormous pride in that connection in reading and across the country, in the areas where there are significant Gurkha communities and Nepalese communities. And there is also a great deal of support and concern about the situation in Nepal. So with that, with those points, I would like to now turn to the floods themselves. And first of all, Mr. McVeigh, I would like to offer my deepest condolences to all those who were affected, both both the families who lost loved ones and those whose loved ones are still missing.
This was a truly awful disaster which affected thousands and thousands of people. I understand the latest estimates are that around 1400 people lost their lives, and that 5000 are still missing. The images are very difficult to describe. As one of my colleagues on Reading Borough Council. Pratiksha Gurung, who's a local councillor who's from Nepal, originally said to me at the time it was so awful that people could simply not watch the news.
They couldn't watch their televisions because of the horrors that were unfolding. And we can all remember that some of the images ourselves. And I would just like to say that our hearts go out to all of those who are involved, both families who lost loved ones and families whose loved ones are still missing. Miss McVeigh. The floods have left grieving families, orphans and lost family members. And sadly, there were several families in my own community in reading, both in my constituency and in neighbouring constituencies, where families lost loved ones.
There's also been a terrible effect on the very large British Nepalese community in Aldershot, and I would like to offer my condolences to all the communities around the country, and I understand many of my colleagues will want to speak about their own communities or just offer their support more generally, and I would like to pay tribute to the work of members from other seats, including my colleagues from the two reading seats from Aldershot, Bracknell, Basingstoke, Oxford, West London and many others.
Many weren't able to to attend today but wanted to offer their support. Could I? Miss McVeigh also thank the Nepalese armed forces, emergency services, emergency workers, medical staff and many others who led the rescue operation in August and early September, and also their international colleagues, including British personnel. They serve with distinction and many of them are continuing to serve now in the difficult aftermath of the disaster. And I should say, I'm also very proud of the links between Britain and Nepal and the support offered by the British government, by charities in Britain and by local communities.
And I'm looking forward to the minister updating the House later on. Much of this. I would like to particularly pay tribute to the help offered by our armed services and by the Foreign Office in the immediate aftermath, and I understand from briefings that I've had with ministers that there was incredibly close working between British and Nepalese forces at the time, and that a range of technical help, as well as financial support, was offered to deal with some very specific issues.
The Fcdo, as is well known, offered a £5 million fund for immediate support and they also increased consular assistance, bringing in extra staff into the embassy in Kathmandu. I would like to thank the government for this prompt response and for the continuing support Britain is offering to Nepal as the second biggest bilateral donor to the country. And I'd also like to mention and thank ministers for their support in Parliament. To myself and other members of the Nepal Appg.
Minister Doughty and Minister Winterton provided vital assistance with casework and with briefings on the fast moving situation. I would like to turn now to the work provided by and the support provided by charities. Dec has provided played an important role and I'm pleased to see the continuing work it is undertaking in Nepal. I also would like to mention Unicef, which provided some briefing to me and some support. And the work of the United Nations in this important.
In this important situation and more locally, I would like to pay tribute to the community groups, including the Greater Reading Nepalese Community Association and others around the country who provided such heartfelt and important support. I would like to mention a number of local residents, in particular Bhimsen Cader, who's the chair of the association in reading. Dev Budha, and his wife , Aruna Gurung Chandra, who's the head of the Forgotten British Gurkha charity, which provides important support to retired Gurkhas in our area, and Pratheeksha and Deepak Gurung Pratheeksha, a local councillor.
Ram Gilani, who's another worker with retired servicemen who works to support service personnel, and also Bipin Diwani, the chargé d'affaires at the Nepalese Embassy, who's been extremely helpful in providing, briefing and encouraging ongoing links between Britain and Nepal and those of us who have Nepalese communities. I would like to just give you an indication of what this felt like at the time, because it's worth understanding the sense of feeling, and I'm sure my colleagues will deal with this as well.
We had a spontaneous vigil in Reading town centre outside, outside our large Marks and Spencers store in Broad Street, which is the main shopping street in the town, and hundreds of people showed up. This is on a Sunday evening. It was organised by the Greater Reading Community Nepalese Community Association. However, there was huge support from people who were not from Nepal and from all walks of life and from across the town, and that was echoed across the country, from what I understand.
And that sense of support was incredible. The sense of, I should say, actually patriotism. Both Nepalese and British patriotism, the level of deep connection with the armed forces, the sense of solidarity between people was quite overwhelming and quite powerful practice for, for example, she's a local councillor. She had a resident who just turned up at her house randomly and saying to her, I would like to give you £50 towards this campaign because it's so, so important to me.
We had other people just stopping in the street when we had the vigil, just coming up to us, asking if they could light a candle, asking if they could show their support. And that level of support was very, very impressive and indeed overwhelming at the time. So I would like to thank all of those who helped, and that is continuing. And it's just developing and continuing. And my own office and other MPs offices have been quite active in working with local campaigners.
I want to pay particular tribute to English Martyrs School, local school in Reading and English Martyrs Church, who are one of many, many organisations who've offered their support. They're offering to do some fundraising through a sponsored walk that is typical of the kind of community based activity which is now underway, which will help support the very long term and much needed reconstruction, the help for the victims, but also the practical reconstruction of the country. So I would just like to to thank everyone for that.
Could I now, I do appreciate other colleagues need to address the issues in their communities. I would like to ask the minister a series of much more specific questions. I look forward to his answers on these. One of the biggest impacts, obviously, has been on families both in Britain and Nepal , and some of the casework is really very, very difficult for us to deal with as local MPs. And I can't go into individual cases. If I can just explain that.
It is really awful what's happened to so many families who have relatives, both in Britain and Nepal, people who are on pilgrimages to the lakes where the water came from, who are still missing in some cases. These are older people. In one case, in in reading, there's a gentleman who's retired Gurkha, who was on a pilgrimage. There are many others from, including from other British communities, many Hindus who attend pilgrimages to these sacred lakes. And it's worth considering the impact on families, both in the short term and the longer term, which is really, really serious.
I do look forward to the minister saying a little bit more about that. There's a very large number of people who are affected, something like 84,000 people, and I think it's around 32,000 children, some of whom are orphans. I was speaking to somebody earlier this week. Some of the orphans are being cared for in monasteries, in Buddhist monasteries in the area, some being cared for and put up in schools. There's still a very real practical implication of what's happened.
This is both a terrible human tragedy, but there are also ongoing practical need. There's an ongoing practical need for for development and for assistance in the area in what is a developing country, which is one of the the lower income countries in the world. There's also. So I would like to ask the Minister for an update on the humanitarian response and the ongoing work in the area, including work within the affected river system, the need to rebuild bridges, schools, homes, and to also provide a greater degree of resilience if these threats are now increasing because of climate change.
And in particular, I would like him to perhaps address some of the detail around the environmental issues and the long term concerns. There actually was another smaller flood this week in the Gorkha district. The Gandaki River flooded and a number of people are now missing. This was a mudslide, and a large amount of mud and rocks went into the river. It's not quite the same. However, it's happening obviously in the same geographical location, and there are great concerns within the British Nepalese community that this type of problem may and disaster may occur again.
And I do need to declare an interest as several members of my family are environmental scientists. My dad actually visited Nepal during a programme in the 1990s, where a number of countries were providing assistance to developing countries to try to provide greater resilience against natural disasters of this kind. I've also visited Nepal completely separately as a walker with my wife some years ago, so I should declare an interest in that sense. But I would particularly like the minister to address the particular risks in mountainous regions like Nepal with very, very steep river valleys, with high levels of rainfall, with glacial lakes and glaciers, which may now be melting, sadly , because of the climate emergency.
What the practical implications of this are how the UK and other advanced countries can provide greater resources to provide monitoring and early warning, and what measures can be taken to provide resilience, greater resilience for the communities involved, who obviously are very much now appear to be now far more at risk of the the potential threats of this type of disaster, or maybe a smaller scale disaster of this type happening again. So I would look forward to him answering those questions and more generally, to talk about the work that Britain is ongoing, the ongoing work Britain has with Nepal around encouraging its development.
I know Nepal had hoped to move out of a certain category of developing countries. It didn't quite make it, but it is developing. There is incredible potential as a new government, which is working very closely with our government. One of the first the first, in fact, official visit to the new government was made by a British minister, which is, I think, very important indication of the special relationship between our two countries. There's scope for greater trade and support as well.
There's a British Nepalese community which is very active across our country as well. So I do look forward to the minister's response. And if I may also ask him, I realise it's not his brief, if he could just contact his colleague in the Mod and ask for an update for the community on the unrelated issue of the pensions for a certain group of Gurkha soldiers, those who retired before 1997, who have a different pension arrangement to the more recent recruits and retirees.
So, miss McVeigh, thank you so much for the opportunity to speak today. I am really grateful to the speaker and to the House authorities for granting me the opportunity to to have this debate, and I look forward to hearing more from colleagues and indeed from the minister. And I look forward to to hearing the other responses. Thank you. Hear, hear.
09:44
09:44
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
As always, an absolute pleasure to serve on your ship. And thank you for what you do as chair in this in this room today. And also, can I particularly commend the honourable gentleman for reading central for bringing this forward. He set the scene incredibly well, as he does with a with a calmness and a surety and with knowledge. And we thank him for that, and we look forward to other contributions. This is a debate that matters not merely in a diplomatic case, but in a deeply human and moral sense.
So I'm grateful to have the opportunity, Madam Chair, to contribute today. In September of last year, Nepal experienced catastrophic flooding that swept through the Kathmandu Valley and the surrounding regions. If we all close our eyes for a second, we can almost imagine and recollect that flow of water, that torrent of, of, of, of water and all the debris that came with it. It just swept everything ahead of it. And it reminds us, of course, of the fickleness of man and how catastrophic and how dangerous nature can be whenever things go wrong.
Towns were submerged, homes were destroyed, and lives were lost in devastating numbers. I remember that in particular, one of the sticks in my mind, Madam Chair, is the one where the the the border post was and the people were walking across in the buses and the cars. And all of a sudden that flood came and everything just disappeared. So that's just how quickly things happened. Hundreds people perished. Thousands more displaced, entire communities left without shelter, clean water, or hope.
And I say this not as a statistic, Madam Chair, but as someone who has an interest in Nepal. Every one of us who are here, of course, have an interest in Paul. That's why we are here as chair of the Appg for Freedom of Religious Belief. Nepal is part of the Parliament All-Party parliamentary Group for freedom. It's one of the places where our visitors as a group. Indeed, the last delegation was was led by Fiona Bruce, a former member for Congleton in this House, and the Appg did do a report afterwards to reflect some of the concerns that we have in Nepal.
Can I say I should have said earlier on, I'll say it now and it is always a pleasure to see the Minister in this place. The minister has a a quiet way with him, but also a very sure way of reassuring the things that concern us. And I have some concerns. I have three questions. I've given it to the civil servants beforehand, so they'll be aware of the of my three asks to the minister. Very happy.
Thank you.
So I'm grateful to have the opportunity, Madam Chair, to contribute today. In September of last year, Nepal experienced catastrophic flooding that swept through the Kathmandu Valley and the surrounding regions. If we all close our eyes for a second, we can almost imagine and recollect that flow of water, that torrent of, of, of, of water and all the debris that came with it. It just swept everything ahead of it. And it reminds us, of course, of the fickleness of man and how catastrophic and how dangerous nature can be whenever things go wrong.
Towns were submerged, homes were destroyed, and lives were lost in devastating numbers. I remember that in particular, one of the sticks in my mind, Madam Chair, is the one where the the the border post was and the people were walking across in the buses and the cars. And all of a sudden that flood came and everything just disappeared. So that's just how quickly things happened. Hundreds people perished. Thousands more displaced, entire communities left without shelter, clean water, or hope.
And I say this not as a statistic, Madam Chair, but as someone who has an interest in Nepal. Every one of us who are here, of course, have an interest in Paul. That's why we are here as chair of the Appg for Freedom of Religious Belief. Nepal is part of the Parliament All-Party parliamentary Group for freedom. It's one of the places where our visitors as a group. Indeed, the last delegation was was led by Fiona Bruce, a former member for Congleton in this House, and the Appg did do a report afterwards to reflect some of the concerns that we have in Nepal.
Can I say I should have said earlier on, I'll say it now and it is always a pleasure to see the Minister in this place. The minister has a a quiet way with him, but also a very sure way of reassuring the things that concern us. And I have some concerns. I have three questions. I've given it to the civil servants beforehand, so they'll be aware of the of my three asks to the minister. Very happy.
Thank you.
09:46
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
I thank the honourable member for giving way. Just when he's outlining the horrendous nature of events in Nepal, would he agree with me that one of the heartwarming issues that arose from that, in the midst of that devastation was the number of faith groups across the UK, and especially in Northern Ireland, who rallied around and raised significant amounts of money to try and help in the midst of the horrendous problems that are continuing to be faced by many, many people in Nepal.
09:47
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Yeah, I was going to refer to that, but the beat me to it. So yes, I, I that in the middle of the devastation, in the middle of the heartache, in the middle of the despair that perhaps we maybe have, we can be encouraged by those who have made an effort, a significant effort to try and help as well. And one of the things that probably. And all the devastation we've seen, the one that also reminds me just how close they were to to the final times in this world, was that school where the school teacher, the principal, was aware of the of the flood coming down the valley, and he got all his children out of the school and got them higher up the mountain.
And they were running to get away. And that seconds, that those seconds were the seconds that saved the lives of those children as as a flood came down and submerged the school where they were, they're no longer maybe ten minutes beforehand. So, so those are things that, that remind us of that. But let's make that clear as well. I don't want to be churlish about the genuine relief efforts that followed and those who made significant contributions, not just in the honourable member for East Londonderry, but also, I believe in everybody else's as well.
And indeed, the member for Redding Central very, very clearly made that comment earlier on. But the humanitarian crisis created by those floods has compounded an existing and deeply troubling pattern of religious persecution that was already fragile before the waters rose. Nepal's a Christian community. It's a Muslim minority. And other religious groups were disproportionately affected in the aftermath. I say this minister to have it recorded because the reports I'm getting back, my churches are getting back at those who have a friends or family in Nepal are telling me aid distribution as open doors, as an example, and aid the church in need.
Two of the very significant groups, Christian groups who were involved in some of the help have both documented. Documented Evidentially was not always. The aid was not always distributed adequately. Reports gathered by the Appg in particular indicate that faith. Minority communities are already marginalised as it is in Nepal. Already facing the threat of Nepal's Anti-conversion laws, which have become stronger and more draconian and more focused, found themselves further disenfranchised in the recovery process because the aid, the already marginalised and they were at the bottom of the queue , probably as it started, as when it came to aid, they were even more disenfranchised.
Neighbours who share a faith with local officials received assistance first. Those who did not wait it. That's not speculation, Madam Chair. Witnesses confirm it. They heard it from community leaders who spoke with quiet dignity about what they had endured. I know it's never the the intention, certainly not from here anyway to make that happen. But in Nepal, unfortunately, it did happen. The polls aren't.
They. Conversion legislation which effectively prescribes the sharing of faith. I'm a Christian, but I believe very strongly that those of other faiths should have the right to practice that faith equally as I do. And I believe that in my heart, and I expect others to believe that unfortunately, in Nepal, that's not what's happening. They created a chilling environment even as aid workers sought to reach the most vulnerable. Amnesty international has raised serious concerns as well.
So these are documented at higher levels. The Appg report, which was done after Fiona Bruce visit as the leader of that deputation on the lines of freedom of religion or belief is intrinsic to human dignity, to human rights, and a disaster must never become an instrument of discrimination and use with that purpose. So my three asks to to the minister, are these please, if I can put them on record? Firstly, will the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Humanitarian response to Nepal specifically include mechanisms to ensure that religious minority communities are not discriminated against in the distribution of aid? I'd love to say that that things have improved. I know, and I remember when I first came here way back in 2010, there was a floods that came down in Pakistan. I have many friends in Pakistan, and it swept right down Pakistan and destroyed much in front of. But Christian groups in Pakistan were not getting the aid that was coming through.
Unfortunately, here again, some 15, 16 years later, we find ourselves where the Christians in Nepal are not finding are not getting the distribution of aid equally. Secondly, will government engage with the Appg on freedom of religious belief to ensure that our diplomatic presence in Kathmandu is actively monitoring forb conditions during this crisis? Really important. And sure, the minister will confirm that, but I do ask and do put it on record.
And thirdly, can I ask the minister kindly, would the minister write to me with a timetable or a timeline for that engagement? Those are my three requests. I'm going to conclude now, Madam Chair, because I'm conscious of others who want to speak. The lifeblood of any credible policy, foreign policy is its consistency. We must stand for the same principles in Kathmandu that we proclaim in this chamber. I always end with with a scripture text.
It's always important that we focus upon what the good book tells us in Proverbs 31, verses eight and nine, it says, do stand up for the oppressed and to speak for those who have no voices. So today in this house, Madam Chair, we have a privilege to to be that spokesperson for those people in Nepal who don't have a voice in the country that they live in. So I commend this issue to the House, and I look forward to very much forward to the Minister's response.
Thank you very much.
And they were running to get away. And that seconds, that those seconds were the seconds that saved the lives of those children as as a flood came down and submerged the school where they were, they're no longer maybe ten minutes beforehand. So, so those are things that, that remind us of that. But let's make that clear as well. I don't want to be churlish about the genuine relief efforts that followed and those who made significant contributions, not just in the honourable member for East Londonderry, but also, I believe in everybody else's as well.
And indeed, the member for Redding Central very, very clearly made that comment earlier on. But the humanitarian crisis created by those floods has compounded an existing and deeply troubling pattern of religious persecution that was already fragile before the waters rose. Nepal's a Christian community. It's a Muslim minority. And other religious groups were disproportionately affected in the aftermath. I say this minister to have it recorded because the reports I'm getting back, my churches are getting back at those who have a friends or family in Nepal are telling me aid distribution as open doors, as an example, and aid the church in need.
Two of the very significant groups, Christian groups who were involved in some of the help have both documented. Documented Evidentially was not always. The aid was not always distributed adequately. Reports gathered by the Appg in particular indicate that faith. Minority communities are already marginalised as it is in Nepal. Already facing the threat of Nepal's Anti-conversion laws, which have become stronger and more draconian and more focused, found themselves further disenfranchised in the recovery process because the aid, the already marginalised and they were at the bottom of the queue , probably as it started, as when it came to aid, they were even more disenfranchised.
Neighbours who share a faith with local officials received assistance first. Those who did not wait it. That's not speculation, Madam Chair. Witnesses confirm it. They heard it from community leaders who spoke with quiet dignity about what they had endured. I know it's never the the intention, certainly not from here anyway to make that happen. But in Nepal, unfortunately, it did happen. The polls aren't.
They. Conversion legislation which effectively prescribes the sharing of faith. I'm a Christian, but I believe very strongly that those of other faiths should have the right to practice that faith equally as I do. And I believe that in my heart, and I expect others to believe that unfortunately, in Nepal, that's not what's happening. They created a chilling environment even as aid workers sought to reach the most vulnerable. Amnesty international has raised serious concerns as well.
So these are documented at higher levels. The Appg report, which was done after Fiona Bruce visit as the leader of that deputation on the lines of freedom of religion or belief is intrinsic to human dignity, to human rights, and a disaster must never become an instrument of discrimination and use with that purpose. So my three asks to to the minister, are these please, if I can put them on record? Firstly, will the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Humanitarian response to Nepal specifically include mechanisms to ensure that religious minority communities are not discriminated against in the distribution of aid? I'd love to say that that things have improved. I know, and I remember when I first came here way back in 2010, there was a floods that came down in Pakistan. I have many friends in Pakistan, and it swept right down Pakistan and destroyed much in front of. But Christian groups in Pakistan were not getting the aid that was coming through.
Unfortunately, here again, some 15, 16 years later, we find ourselves where the Christians in Nepal are not finding are not getting the distribution of aid equally. Secondly, will government engage with the Appg on freedom of religious belief to ensure that our diplomatic presence in Kathmandu is actively monitoring forb conditions during this crisis? Really important. And sure, the minister will confirm that, but I do ask and do put it on record.
And thirdly, can I ask the minister kindly, would the minister write to me with a timetable or a timeline for that engagement? Those are my three requests. I'm going to conclude now, Madam Chair, because I'm conscious of others who want to speak. The lifeblood of any credible policy, foreign policy is its consistency. We must stand for the same principles in Kathmandu that we proclaim in this chamber. I always end with with a scripture text.
It's always important that we focus upon what the good book tells us in Proverbs 31, verses eight and nine, it says, do stand up for the oppressed and to speak for those who have no voices. So today in this house, Madam Chair, we have a privilege to to be that spokesperson for those people in Nepal who don't have a voice in the country that they live in. So I commend this issue to the House, and I look forward to very much forward to the Minister's response.
Thank you very much.
09:53
09:53
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Thank you. And it's a real honour to be able to speak in this important debate. I'm very grateful for the opportunity and of course, grateful to my honourable friend for Reading East and particularly pleased to be following on from such powerful speeches, which have set out that very proud relationship between our countries, between the UK and Nepal, which has existed for such a long time. Of course, the steadfast contribution of Gurkhas over many decades, right up until the present day.
The interpersonal links between our countries that are incredibly strong, and the contribution that is played today by Nepali British people in our public services, economy and culture. And I'm very proud of Oxford's Nepalese community, which contributes so much to my city and that community. Our neighbours, our friends, our workmates, they are grieving now. They're grieving for the loss of many family and friends. And of course, their loss was in such shocking circumstances.
Obviously, speakers have already referred to the images that we saw, images that looked like they were out of some kind of horrendous feature film, not really taking place and affecting people in circumstances that have been so peaceful. People on pilgrimage, for example, in one of the most beautiful places on earth, and people in their homes and workplaces. I believe that we in the UK and in my city, we now have a window onto the sharpest end of the climate crisis.
Many Nepalese people live on the council estate where I live of Rose Hill. Oxford's Nepalese people have made a huge contribution to our city. Of course, the many retired Gurkhas who live in Oxford and we always are moved to see that reflected in our remembrance service every November, but also due to the many who serve in academia, in healthcare, as in reading, in childcare, in business, the many Nepalese restaurants that were very pleased to have and in many forms of public service, including volunteering to support the community with the Nepalese contribution to Oxiclean being particularly notable.
So there's a really long and strong history of us working together over so many decades, indeed centuries, and we've got to intensify that now. I recently had the privilege of meeting with Mr. Tulasi Paudel from help from Nepal and the Nepalese community in Oxfordshire. I'm very grateful for that group's work and also for that of the Nepalese Society, Oxfordshire retired captain Paudel explained to me the human impact of what my colleagues and friends have just talked about, those devastating recent events and as others have done, I want to express my sincere condolences to all of those who have been affected, the many thousands who still do not know what happened to their families.
Of course, as has been mentioned, we still see damaged roads and bridges which have cut off entire communities. Survivors are still in need, often of shelter, despite the best efforts of those who've come to their aid. Clean drinking water is still a huge problem, as well as medical supplies and food. And the UK is £5 million . Package of humanitarian assistance to support those affected was most welcome, of course, and I know that the UK has historically provided support to strengthen Nepal's resilience to climate related disasters.
But I believe, and Mr. Paudel believes, that more can and must be done. Yes, of course, this relates to humanitarian support , and we've already heard, I think, some very helpful comments from other speakers in this debate on that subject. It's going to be particularly important as people are seeking to rebuild their lives after such a horrendous set of circumstances, losing everything. But I believe that we have to work together politically and multilaterally as well.
I wrote during the UN General Assembly, which of course has just ended, to the Foreign Secretary, with Mr. Paudel calling on our Foreign Secretary to work with the Nepalese government, with its calls for practical global action to tackle climate change and climate justice. And we also push for our countries, the UK and Nepal to work together in the run up to the Cop in Antalya and in every international event where climate action is discussed.
The Himalayas are a vital water source for a large part of Asia, and what happens to the Himalayan cryosphere has consequences far beyond Nepal. The people living beneath the Himalayas should not have to pay the greatest price for a climate crisis. They contributed so little to creating. So the UK has an important opportunity here to stand alongside countries like Nepal. Given that strong historical and present relationship. Nepalese people have given our country so much.
Now we've got to stand alongside them. We must help ensure that the voices of vulnerable Himalayan communities calling for climate action are heard and are acted upon. So I call on the minister and our government to seek out every opportunity to develop common positions on climate action with Nepalese counterparts, and to use their voice to amplify that of our Nepalese friends. Thank you.
The interpersonal links between our countries that are incredibly strong, and the contribution that is played today by Nepali British people in our public services, economy and culture. And I'm very proud of Oxford's Nepalese community, which contributes so much to my city and that community. Our neighbours, our friends, our workmates, they are grieving now. They're grieving for the loss of many family and friends. And of course, their loss was in such shocking circumstances.
Obviously, speakers have already referred to the images that we saw, images that looked like they were out of some kind of horrendous feature film, not really taking place and affecting people in circumstances that have been so peaceful. People on pilgrimage, for example, in one of the most beautiful places on earth, and people in their homes and workplaces. I believe that we in the UK and in my city, we now have a window onto the sharpest end of the climate crisis.
Many Nepalese people live on the council estate where I live of Rose Hill. Oxford's Nepalese people have made a huge contribution to our city. Of course, the many retired Gurkhas who live in Oxford and we always are moved to see that reflected in our remembrance service every November, but also due to the many who serve in academia, in healthcare, as in reading, in childcare, in business, the many Nepalese restaurants that were very pleased to have and in many forms of public service, including volunteering to support the community with the Nepalese contribution to Oxiclean being particularly notable.
So there's a really long and strong history of us working together over so many decades, indeed centuries, and we've got to intensify that now. I recently had the privilege of meeting with Mr. Tulasi Paudel from help from Nepal and the Nepalese community in Oxfordshire. I'm very grateful for that group's work and also for that of the Nepalese Society, Oxfordshire retired captain Paudel explained to me the human impact of what my colleagues and friends have just talked about, those devastating recent events and as others have done, I want to express my sincere condolences to all of those who have been affected, the many thousands who still do not know what happened to their families.
Of course, as has been mentioned, we still see damaged roads and bridges which have cut off entire communities. Survivors are still in need, often of shelter, despite the best efforts of those who've come to their aid. Clean drinking water is still a huge problem, as well as medical supplies and food. And the UK is £5 million . Package of humanitarian assistance to support those affected was most welcome, of course, and I know that the UK has historically provided support to strengthen Nepal's resilience to climate related disasters.
But I believe, and Mr. Paudel believes, that more can and must be done. Yes, of course, this relates to humanitarian support , and we've already heard, I think, some very helpful comments from other speakers in this debate on that subject. It's going to be particularly important as people are seeking to rebuild their lives after such a horrendous set of circumstances, losing everything. But I believe that we have to work together politically and multilaterally as well.
I wrote during the UN General Assembly, which of course has just ended, to the Foreign Secretary, with Mr. Paudel calling on our Foreign Secretary to work with the Nepalese government, with its calls for practical global action to tackle climate change and climate justice. And we also push for our countries, the UK and Nepal to work together in the run up to the Cop in Antalya and in every international event where climate action is discussed.
The Himalayas are a vital water source for a large part of Asia, and what happens to the Himalayan cryosphere has consequences far beyond Nepal. The people living beneath the Himalayas should not have to pay the greatest price for a climate crisis. They contributed so little to creating. So the UK has an important opportunity here to stand alongside countries like Nepal. Given that strong historical and present relationship. Nepalese people have given our country so much.
Now we've got to stand alongside them. We must help ensure that the voices of vulnerable Himalayan communities calling for climate action are heard and are acted upon. So I call on the minister and our government to seek out every opportunity to develop common positions on climate action with Nepalese counterparts, and to use their voice to amplify that of our Nepalese friends. Thank you.
09:59
09:59
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
I join others in praising my honourable friend for Reading East in securing this very helpful debate. Nepal is a is a country of remarkable people, soaring beauty and extraordinary fragility. Its people are brave and resilient, but also increasingly vulnerable. The levels of poverty in Nepal are still shockingly high. Over 20% of the population live below the poverty line, and on the key human development indexes, Nepal ranks 146th out of 193 countries.
I first visited Nepal at the end of its civil war, a conflict that killed over 17,000 people and which left over 100,000 people displaced. The scale and the length of that conflict still leaves a long a long tail. But now it's the grim reality of climate change, which headlines the ongoing story of Nepal's vulnerability and fragility. As my hon. Friends have already referenced, the catastrophic floods of the 26th of August killed at least 4355 people in Nepal, with over 5000 people still missing.
According to the latest figures, it was good to see the UK announcing very quickly £5 million in emergency humanitarian assistance delivered through UN agencies, the Red cross and and local organisations. And it was also good to see my hon. Friend's colleague Lady Winterton, visiting Nepal quickly in the immediate aftermath of of the conflict. It is worth, I think, though, referencing the fact that Nepal's estimated recovery and reconstruction requirements are approximately £5 billion, including measures to improve resilience to future disasters.
And it. And as a country, it simply isn't going to have the scale of financial finances available on its own to put the right measures in place. And it's therefore surely incumbent on the UK, as a long standing friend of Nepal, to continue to engage with the Nepalese and the international community to find a solution to those financing challenges. Our relationship with Nepal extends well beyond development assistance.
It encompasses Gurkha service that's been referenced already, cultural links, educational connections and a very significant Nepali diaspora in in the UK, in Harrow. There is a very significant Nepalese community , and I in particular have regular contact with that community, notably with Raj Tripathy, a very active member of the Nepalese community in South Harrow, and have attended community fundraising efforts, bringing residents together to raise money for those affected by the disaster.
And in particular, I will do. Just a second. And in particular, I pay tribute to the South South Harrow business community for coming together to raise funds. To send back to Nepal to help Nepalese friends from this community in Nepal begin to recover and give way to my friend.
I first visited Nepal at the end of its civil war, a conflict that killed over 17,000 people and which left over 100,000 people displaced. The scale and the length of that conflict still leaves a long a long tail. But now it's the grim reality of climate change, which headlines the ongoing story of Nepal's vulnerability and fragility. As my hon. Friends have already referenced, the catastrophic floods of the 26th of August killed at least 4355 people in Nepal, with over 5000 people still missing.
According to the latest figures, it was good to see the UK announcing very quickly £5 million in emergency humanitarian assistance delivered through UN agencies, the Red cross and and local organisations. And it was also good to see my hon. Friend's colleague Lady Winterton, visiting Nepal quickly in the immediate aftermath of of the conflict. It is worth, I think, though, referencing the fact that Nepal's estimated recovery and reconstruction requirements are approximately £5 billion, including measures to improve resilience to future disasters.
And it. And as a country, it simply isn't going to have the scale of financial finances available on its own to put the right measures in place. And it's therefore surely incumbent on the UK, as a long standing friend of Nepal, to continue to engage with the Nepalese and the international community to find a solution to those financing challenges. Our relationship with Nepal extends well beyond development assistance.
It encompasses Gurkha service that's been referenced already, cultural links, educational connections and a very significant Nepali diaspora in in the UK, in Harrow. There is a very significant Nepalese community , and I in particular have regular contact with that community, notably with Raj Tripathy, a very active member of the Nepalese community in South Harrow, and have attended community fundraising efforts, bringing residents together to raise money for those affected by the disaster.
And in particular, I will do. Just a second. And in particular, I pay tribute to the South South Harrow business community for coming together to raise funds. To send back to Nepal to help Nepalese friends from this community in Nepal begin to recover and give way to my friend.
10:02
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
I. I thank my hon. Friend for giving way and I wanted to talk about. We don't have a substantial Nepalese community in Cornwall, but I did want to mention Mr. Sharma and his family from my constituency from Balti Curries, who immediately, immediately raised an appeal and raised over £2,600 in a very short period of time, which shows how how important, I suppose, the community is, even in places like Cornwall.
10:03
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Well, I pay tribute to my hon. Friend's constituent and to her support for his for his fundraising efforts. As she says, the speed with which the British Nepalese community have responded to the disaster, in raising in raising funds and getting those funds back to to friends and family in communities affected by the floods in Nepal has been nothing other than impressive. I wonder if my right hon. Friend will dwell in his response on how the international community is responding to the disaster going forward.
Inevitably, when a humanitarian disaster strikes, there is a lot of media attention and that helps to galvanise different parts of the international community. It sadly, when the when media attention moves on, that's when. Often the most important assistance can be provided in making sure that the long effort to build communities back and put in place more effective development assistance going forward is is needed. Britain's got a long track record of of effective development operation and given the links to Nepal and given its needs, surely we have a particular responsibility going forward to stay the course and to keep and to work with both China and and India to, to support the efforts to raise the funds and and see them used in the most effective way possible to support those communities recovering.
The last time I visited Nepal, it was to look at development work that was just beginning to help manage the impact of climate change. And I mention that because Nepal's Prime Minister described the floods at the UN General Assembly as not just a local tragedy, but as a warning to the world, arguing that climate change is destabilizing the Himalayan ecosystem. Scientific studies and world weather attribution analysis suggests that climate change likely contributed to the glacier retreat and permafrost thaw, increasing the instability in the mountains.
Although researchers have suggested it wasn't the sole cause of the collapse, what experts are arguing is that the disaster highlights the need for stronger glacial monitoring going forward, early warning systems being further honed, hazard mapping and cross-border information sharing. Noting that the current coverage of that in the Nepal and the Himalayan regions remains relatively limited. And that feels like something that where the UK could certainly add value in sorting out the UN's.
Highlighted extensive damage to roads, to power networks, to water and sanitation systems, again underlining the importance of rebuilding infrastructure in ways that reduce vulnerability to future disasters. Infrastructure is usually the preserve of the multilateral banks in the international development system, we play a key role in funding the world Bank, the Asian Development Bank and others. And again, it would be good to hear from the minister today if or by letter, if not possible, what role Britain is playing to make sure the world Bank and other bits of the multilateral system are stepping up their efforts in in this regard? Lastly, I think we need to recognize the.
That there is an ongoing responsibility to surely to support Nepal's development beyond just providing humanitarian aid and I. An ideas Nepal needs more trade, it needs more investment. And whilst India and China should and could do to do more, I'm sure in that regard, given our historic role, given our historic links to to to Nepal in the Commonwealth, surely there is more we can do to help Nepalese businesses get access to trade opportunities here in the UK.
So I wonder whether Minister would the Minister would encourage his officials to explore options for a British Nepal Investment Conference to boost trade and explore opportunities again, perhaps for British businesses to invest more in. In Nepalese businesses in the UK. Very. Lastly, I echo my honourable friend in asking for an update from the Mod about the issues affecting Mod pensions for a number of Gurkha veterans. . Luke
Inevitably, when a humanitarian disaster strikes, there is a lot of media attention and that helps to galvanise different parts of the international community. It sadly, when the when media attention moves on, that's when. Often the most important assistance can be provided in making sure that the long effort to build communities back and put in place more effective development assistance going forward is is needed. Britain's got a long track record of of effective development operation and given the links to Nepal and given its needs, surely we have a particular responsibility going forward to stay the course and to keep and to work with both China and and India to, to support the efforts to raise the funds and and see them used in the most effective way possible to support those communities recovering.
The last time I visited Nepal, it was to look at development work that was just beginning to help manage the impact of climate change. And I mention that because Nepal's Prime Minister described the floods at the UN General Assembly as not just a local tragedy, but as a warning to the world, arguing that climate change is destabilizing the Himalayan ecosystem. Scientific studies and world weather attribution analysis suggests that climate change likely contributed to the glacier retreat and permafrost thaw, increasing the instability in the mountains.
Although researchers have suggested it wasn't the sole cause of the collapse, what experts are arguing is that the disaster highlights the need for stronger glacial monitoring going forward, early warning systems being further honed, hazard mapping and cross-border information sharing. Noting that the current coverage of that in the Nepal and the Himalayan regions remains relatively limited. And that feels like something that where the UK could certainly add value in sorting out the UN's.
Highlighted extensive damage to roads, to power networks, to water and sanitation systems, again underlining the importance of rebuilding infrastructure in ways that reduce vulnerability to future disasters. Infrastructure is usually the preserve of the multilateral banks in the international development system, we play a key role in funding the world Bank, the Asian Development Bank and others. And again, it would be good to hear from the minister today if or by letter, if not possible, what role Britain is playing to make sure the world Bank and other bits of the multilateral system are stepping up their efforts in in this regard? Lastly, I think we need to recognize the.
That there is an ongoing responsibility to surely to support Nepal's development beyond just providing humanitarian aid and I. An ideas Nepal needs more trade, it needs more investment. And whilst India and China should and could do to do more, I'm sure in that regard, given our historic role, given our historic links to to to Nepal in the Commonwealth, surely there is more we can do to help Nepalese businesses get access to trade opportunities here in the UK.
So I wonder whether Minister would the Minister would encourage his officials to explore options for a British Nepal Investment Conference to boost trade and explore opportunities again, perhaps for British businesses to invest more in. In Nepalese businesses in the UK. Very. Lastly, I echo my honourable friend in asking for an update from the Mod about the issues affecting Mod pensions for a number of Gurkha veterans. . Luke
10:08
10:08
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Thank you. It's a pleasure to serve under your chair, Mr. McVey. I'm particularly grateful for your latitude given my slight tardy arrival to the debate, and I'm also grateful to the member for Reading Central in securing this debate. As many others have said, the floods have caused catastrophic damage in terms of loss of life. As the member for Harry West just mentioned, Nepal's National disaster agency has highlighted that 1455 people have been confirmed dead and over 5000 are missing.
And as many other members have mentioned, few of us will forget the devastating scenes that we saw on our television screens as whole places were swept away as a result of the floods, and sadly, as a result of the number of people missing, the death toll is likely to continue to rise. And it's also likely to continue to affect many other lives with homes, schools and health services ruined, whole communities devastated, it will take a long time to rebuild.
And as other members have said, that's why the long term commitment and support of the UK government through this, with in partnership with the Nepalese government, will be so important. And this horrifying event has not just impacted Nepal and those in Tibet, but also the Nepalese community around the world, including the Nepalese community, who have proudly made the UK their home. I'm really proud to represent one of the largest Nepalese communities in the UK, including many Gurkha veterans, and I know how much of an impact this incident has had on our local community, and I was pleased to join them at a local vigil.
And just as the member for Redding Central mentioned, was incredibly well attended from people of all backgrounds, and that was organised by the Basingstoke Nepalese community. And there we reflected not just on the profound loss and impact of the floods, but also the acts of heroism, small and large, that have been carried out by many people in Nepal during the floods. As the member for Strangford mentioned, the school principal, Rajendra Dawadi, whose quick thinking saved the lives of 900 children, or to hearing Tamang, the school bus driver whose quick thinking driving 50 children across a bridge before it was swept away, saved their lives.
Or prior. Adhikari, who was the first female helicopter pilot who threw over 100 rescue missions during the crisis and those acts of heroism will also be met by small acts of support, including by the Nepalese community, who have been leading the fundraising efforts to support those affected by the flood back home. And I want to pay tribute to the chair, BJ and the General Secretary, Jagadeesh and the whole committee in Basingstoke for their work in leading that support, and I also welcome the support of the UK government that we've given to Nepal and the British nationals affected by the floods.
As many others have mentioned, this includes the £5 million in humanitarian assistance for emergency shelter, healthcare, food, clean water and sanitation. The longer term partnership, which has existed for a long time, which has included £100 million for from the UK for Nepal's Disaster Resilience, humanitarian assistance and climate adaptation, and also the wider financial support that others have mentioned through institutions like the world Bank. The other acts, including the consular support, the staffing and deployment, the diplomatic engagement, ministerial visits and engagement with affected communities in the UK was incredibly well received by the local community in Basingstoke, and again, it does highlight, as others have mentioned, that long standing partnership and friendship between our two countries.
As the member for Oxford East mentioned as well, this disaster also particularly highlights once again the disastrous impacts of climate change. It shows the important leadership role that the UK can, must and is playing in combating what is the greatest threat to our economy, society and security here in the UK, but also around the world. So I do really welcome the fact that this government remains committed to meeting our climate targets here at home, but also that the new Foreign Secretary has rightly placed climate and nature security at the heart of our national security and foreign policy decision making, as these floods have shown, and as the Foreign Secretary has said, climate change and nature loss are not just issues for climate and environment ministers alone, they are defining challenges for our economies, our foreign policy and our national security.
And no one recognizes that that more than the people of Nepal. And it was a big theme of the vigil event that we hosted in Basingstoke as well. I'd like to conclude by asking the minister, as others had, what further action the government will be taking in supporting Nepal in recovering from these floods, seeking reassurance that the government will remain engaged on helping that recovery in the medium to long term. As the member has said, I just want to echo that that long term support this is going to be such a long recovery , will be so important long after it's been forgotten and is no longer being played on the news.
We must remain a steadfast partner and also reassurance that the support will remain available for British nationals affected, including those who may have loved ones among the missing. Finally, I'd also like to echo the member for Reading Central's request or urge of the government to finally resolve the pensions issue, which I've been working with the local Gurkha community on in Basingstoke. Finally, I'd like to pay tribute to the Nepalese community locally, who I'm so proud to represent here.
And as many other members have mentioned, few of us will forget the devastating scenes that we saw on our television screens as whole places were swept away as a result of the floods, and sadly, as a result of the number of people missing, the death toll is likely to continue to rise. And it's also likely to continue to affect many other lives with homes, schools and health services ruined, whole communities devastated, it will take a long time to rebuild.
And as other members have said, that's why the long term commitment and support of the UK government through this, with in partnership with the Nepalese government, will be so important. And this horrifying event has not just impacted Nepal and those in Tibet, but also the Nepalese community around the world, including the Nepalese community, who have proudly made the UK their home. I'm really proud to represent one of the largest Nepalese communities in the UK, including many Gurkha veterans, and I know how much of an impact this incident has had on our local community, and I was pleased to join them at a local vigil.
And just as the member for Redding Central mentioned, was incredibly well attended from people of all backgrounds, and that was organised by the Basingstoke Nepalese community. And there we reflected not just on the profound loss and impact of the floods, but also the acts of heroism, small and large, that have been carried out by many people in Nepal during the floods. As the member for Strangford mentioned, the school principal, Rajendra Dawadi, whose quick thinking saved the lives of 900 children, or to hearing Tamang, the school bus driver whose quick thinking driving 50 children across a bridge before it was swept away, saved their lives.
Or prior. Adhikari, who was the first female helicopter pilot who threw over 100 rescue missions during the crisis and those acts of heroism will also be met by small acts of support, including by the Nepalese community, who have been leading the fundraising efforts to support those affected by the flood back home. And I want to pay tribute to the chair, BJ and the General Secretary, Jagadeesh and the whole committee in Basingstoke for their work in leading that support, and I also welcome the support of the UK government that we've given to Nepal and the British nationals affected by the floods.
As many others have mentioned, this includes the £5 million in humanitarian assistance for emergency shelter, healthcare, food, clean water and sanitation. The longer term partnership, which has existed for a long time, which has included £100 million for from the UK for Nepal's Disaster Resilience, humanitarian assistance and climate adaptation, and also the wider financial support that others have mentioned through institutions like the world Bank. The other acts, including the consular support, the staffing and deployment, the diplomatic engagement, ministerial visits and engagement with affected communities in the UK was incredibly well received by the local community in Basingstoke, and again, it does highlight, as others have mentioned, that long standing partnership and friendship between our two countries.
As the member for Oxford East mentioned as well, this disaster also particularly highlights once again the disastrous impacts of climate change. It shows the important leadership role that the UK can, must and is playing in combating what is the greatest threat to our economy, society and security here in the UK, but also around the world. So I do really welcome the fact that this government remains committed to meeting our climate targets here at home, but also that the new Foreign Secretary has rightly placed climate and nature security at the heart of our national security and foreign policy decision making, as these floods have shown, and as the Foreign Secretary has said, climate change and nature loss are not just issues for climate and environment ministers alone, they are defining challenges for our economies, our foreign policy and our national security.
And no one recognizes that that more than the people of Nepal. And it was a big theme of the vigil event that we hosted in Basingstoke as well. I'd like to conclude by asking the minister, as others had, what further action the government will be taking in supporting Nepal in recovering from these floods, seeking reassurance that the government will remain engaged on helping that recovery in the medium to long term. As the member has said, I just want to echo that that long term support this is going to be such a long recovery , will be so important long after it's been forgotten and is no longer being played on the news.
We must remain a steadfast partner and also reassurance that the support will remain available for British nationals affected, including those who may have loved ones among the missing. Finally, I'd also like to echo the member for Reading Central's request or urge of the government to finally resolve the pensions issue, which I've been working with the local Gurkha community on in Basingstoke. Finally, I'd like to pay tribute to the Nepalese community locally, who I'm so proud to represent here.
10:14
10:14
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship and may I also thank my hon. Friend the member for Reading Central on securing this debate, and I think with the contributions that we have seen, that this is a matter of great interest to the House and how we are continuing to support Nepal after the devastating floods, floods that were experienced just a couple of months ago. And I am grateful for the tone of this debate and the way in which it has outlined the support, the engagement that the UK has with Nepal, this very, very challenging time within the context of our long standing relationship and friendship and our support for each other, and certainly to recognise the very strong relationship we have with the Gurkhas, who form a very important part of the British army.
And I was also very privileged to be able to meet and visit the Royal Gurkha Rifles in Brunei when I visited, and to see their exceptional skill and the way in which we work together on tropical jungle warfare , and how they form a very key part of the British army's elite capabilities in such warfare, and also supporting the training of other forces in the region. And I know that we will all want to offer our deepest condolences to those who lost loved ones, whole communities that were affected, schools and that were washed away, homes that were washed away, thousands and thousands, tens of thousands of either lost their lives or been affected.
And so many who are still unaccounted for. And I heard just yesterday from someone about how they were going ahead with with funeral prayers, because they recognise that their loved one was never going to come back. They were never going to find her body. But it was important that they also were able to find a way for closure for the families and and to support each other. And this in this time and in what will be a long term relationship that we will have to.
Long term support, that we will need to, to have to support Nepal as it continues to recover. And I do want to also recognise the scale of the impact. A recent report that has indicated that the total cost of damage is around 2.7 billion USD. It is extraordinary and when we look at how and where it took place and the sort of hydropower plants where where so many were also working, the pilgrimages that were affected, those who were coming from a range of countries and including India and in Nepal, and also the Tibetan region that was affected.
What this has also shown is how important it is, as my right hon. Friend was also saying, the importance of making sure that we work internationally, and one of the areas I would be grateful for an update from the Minister on is how we are working with the Indian government, with the Chinese government, as well as with our international NGOs and the international community, including international finance institutions, on the recovery, but also the long term progress for Nepal.
I do want to also thank the All-Party parliamentary Group for meetings that were held very quickly, and also Bipin from the Nepalese Embassy, to make sure that we have a connection in those conversations between our communities here in the United Kingdom, our our parties across Parliament, but also that dialogue with government and between the UK and Nepal. And I want to thank the minister here, but also the minister, Baroness Rosie Winterton, who I know changed her her plans when she was abroad to make a very quick visit to Nepal, to be able to stand in solidarity with Nepal on behalf of the UK, but also to demonstrate the leadership that the UK was bringing in, helping coordinate some of the humanitarian efforts and understand what the needs of the Nepal government were from the international community at this time.
And that dialogue continues, and I'm grateful also to the Minister for the interest she has shown in the conversations I've been having with my Nepalese community. There is a very, very large community, Mr. McVeigh in Hounslow and particularly in Feltham and Heston, and I am grateful also to our former mayor, Bishnu Gurung , himself a Gurkha veteran, and also to those in my constituency who have come from the region that was affected.
I particularly want to mention Dawa, Lama, Susheela, Padma for the inputs that they have given, which I will share briefly today, but also to thank Munira from KTM, who held a fundraiser as well, that was really appreciated by the community as a way in which people, as we've heard from other honourable members, a way in which people were able to come together to support each other and to raise vital funds as well. But this is important because the as I as I also saw on my visit to Nepal back in May, where I was very fortunate not just to visit Kathmandu, but also Lumbini, which is a Unesco World Heritage Site and the birthplace of Lord Buddha.
An extraordinary experience also of visiting the Maya Devi temple that. The backdrop to that visit, which I do want to speak about briefly, was how we work together as two nations to support Nepal's economic ambitions and their growth in the country. And I was reminded of how closely we worked with Nepal after the 2015 earthquake, when I also visited Nepal with my constituents. At that time, it was a long term partnership to support that, that recovery.
And I and I think it is important to to recognise the ambition that the new Nepalese government has demonstrated in wanting to see a future for Nepal that is putting Nepal much more on the world stage in terms of industrial partnerships, growth and ambition. And it is the reason why I will also reference the the ambitions of my hon. Friend the member for Harrow West, in his call for a British Nepal Investment Conference, and I hope that that can be taken away by the Minister from the Foreign Office in discussion to also have with the Department for business, innovation, Science and Technology.
But if I can just reference the ambitions of the government, which was so. I was so pleased to be able to discuss with them on one of the first ministerial visits to Nepal after the. The elections, where it was important to recognise that the Nepal economy had been growing from 2% in 2023 to 3.7% by 3.7% in 2024, 4.4% in 2025, and had has aspirations to grow to have have an an average real economic growth rate of 7% over the next decade.
And , and so that data as well, historic data from the world Bank and the aspiration that has also been underpinned by fundamental restructuring of economic incentives. Intentions to simplify the business environment in Nepal, to also attract more domestic, foreign and diaspora investment. You know, this sense of ambition, also of reform to the tax regime and digital economy reforms is, is, is really, I think, also was mentioned and set out in detail in an article in May of Rising Nepal, which was in an English language newspaper in Nepal.
And I think to recognise what the Foreign Minister was also saying at this time, thinking about the the immense potential that Nepal has also around clean energy production and, and looking at agriculture and tourism and industry, information technology, human capital. These were subjects of my dialogue as well in Nepal and also the conversations I've had with my the diaspora communities here in the United Kingdom. And I say this because with all of that ambition, that's an important backdrop for the conversations that we are having, because it is to recognise that as we come together, it is so important to support the recovery which is to be which will have long term implications as well in Nepal following the devastating floods.
But to keep our focus as well on how we support a greater resilience in Nepal, also picking up on points raised by honourable members about how we can see Nepal have a programme for stronger resilience, for disaster prediction, for understanding the data that might be specific to the environment, which is for all, for what we with what we know, with the Himalayas and with Nepal being a global destination and a very unique spot that is important not just for, for, for leisure and for resilience and mountaineering, but also for spiritual retreats and to recognise its very unique place and, and natural assets that mean that it's open for partnerships around the world and one that aligns so much with our own aspirations around clean and green energy and supporting that transformation, not just in the United Kingdom with our ambitious targets, but also our leadership across the world, and to support countries where we can see that there is great potential and opportunity that requires investment and capability, support from across the world.
So I would like to also understand, as a second question from the minister, what work we are doing to support investment to ensure greater resilience, and I am grateful for the conversations I've had with scientists in Nepal about this and where they see great potential for how British scientists, universities can be part of that story for Nepal's future. And if there is anything that we have learned from this, and also the the, the the contributions from honourable members about where there have also been more recent natural disasters and the risk of those that are shared, that it is a project that we should be looking at with greater urgency, and it will require I would I would certainly suspect, international finance for the bigger scale projects and to do that with scientists, partnerships, scientific partnerships around the world as well.
Now, my constituents have also raised with me the importance of keeping climate change on the agenda. It is so important that we don't just look at short term, short term politics, whether that's in the UK or it's in the US, we have got to look at the underlying direction of travel that we must continue to take on tackling climate change, because what Nepalese Nepalese community have said to me is that Nepal hasn't contributed to climate change, and yet they suffer in the way that they have and that that risk will continue unless we also take continue that global leadership as an international community on making sure that we take climate change seriously and that we tackle we both tackle the and prevent climate change, but also put in place resilience for tackling the impacts of it.
But may I also just come to some of the UK's response, for which I am grateful. And the £5 million that was immediately announced. There has been an important part of deploying our UK. The UK's wider response to the flooding and the support that it. That it's brought with the combination of UN, Red cross and NGO interventions. Some of that humanitarian support has been absolutely critical, but it is also the case that.
It is also the case that there is important work that must continue in how we support regions that haven't had the investment now to recover constituents that are from the area, those who have been one of whom has been a civil engineer in in hydropower, who's whose own colleagues were affected, has has raised with me about the importance of building bridges, roads, and also making sure that we've got safeguarding for young people, children, children, children who have lost their parents.
What I will say , as I as I wrap up miss McVay, is that the recovery and relief efforts, the humanitarian efforts, the road building, the bridge, building, the safeguarding of children are issues that have been raised. And if the minister doesn't mind, I will be writing to the minister on that, and particularly the affected areas of Typekit Soleil and Kiss Bang Rural Municipality that my constituents have raised with me. Thank you, miss McVay.
And I was also very privileged to be able to meet and visit the Royal Gurkha Rifles in Brunei when I visited, and to see their exceptional skill and the way in which we work together on tropical jungle warfare , and how they form a very key part of the British army's elite capabilities in such warfare, and also supporting the training of other forces in the region. And I know that we will all want to offer our deepest condolences to those who lost loved ones, whole communities that were affected, schools and that were washed away, homes that were washed away, thousands and thousands, tens of thousands of either lost their lives or been affected.
And so many who are still unaccounted for. And I heard just yesterday from someone about how they were going ahead with with funeral prayers, because they recognise that their loved one was never going to come back. They were never going to find her body. But it was important that they also were able to find a way for closure for the families and and to support each other. And this in this time and in what will be a long term relationship that we will have to.
Long term support, that we will need to, to have to support Nepal as it continues to recover. And I do want to also recognise the scale of the impact. A recent report that has indicated that the total cost of damage is around 2.7 billion USD. It is extraordinary and when we look at how and where it took place and the sort of hydropower plants where where so many were also working, the pilgrimages that were affected, those who were coming from a range of countries and including India and in Nepal, and also the Tibetan region that was affected.
What this has also shown is how important it is, as my right hon. Friend was also saying, the importance of making sure that we work internationally, and one of the areas I would be grateful for an update from the Minister on is how we are working with the Indian government, with the Chinese government, as well as with our international NGOs and the international community, including international finance institutions, on the recovery, but also the long term progress for Nepal.
I do want to also thank the All-Party parliamentary Group for meetings that were held very quickly, and also Bipin from the Nepalese Embassy, to make sure that we have a connection in those conversations between our communities here in the United Kingdom, our our parties across Parliament, but also that dialogue with government and between the UK and Nepal. And I want to thank the minister here, but also the minister, Baroness Rosie Winterton, who I know changed her her plans when she was abroad to make a very quick visit to Nepal, to be able to stand in solidarity with Nepal on behalf of the UK, but also to demonstrate the leadership that the UK was bringing in, helping coordinate some of the humanitarian efforts and understand what the needs of the Nepal government were from the international community at this time.
And that dialogue continues, and I'm grateful also to the Minister for the interest she has shown in the conversations I've been having with my Nepalese community. There is a very, very large community, Mr. McVeigh in Hounslow and particularly in Feltham and Heston, and I am grateful also to our former mayor, Bishnu Gurung , himself a Gurkha veteran, and also to those in my constituency who have come from the region that was affected.
I particularly want to mention Dawa, Lama, Susheela, Padma for the inputs that they have given, which I will share briefly today, but also to thank Munira from KTM, who held a fundraiser as well, that was really appreciated by the community as a way in which people, as we've heard from other honourable members, a way in which people were able to come together to support each other and to raise vital funds as well. But this is important because the as I as I also saw on my visit to Nepal back in May, where I was very fortunate not just to visit Kathmandu, but also Lumbini, which is a Unesco World Heritage Site and the birthplace of Lord Buddha.
An extraordinary experience also of visiting the Maya Devi temple that. The backdrop to that visit, which I do want to speak about briefly, was how we work together as two nations to support Nepal's economic ambitions and their growth in the country. And I was reminded of how closely we worked with Nepal after the 2015 earthquake, when I also visited Nepal with my constituents. At that time, it was a long term partnership to support that, that recovery.
And I and I think it is important to to recognise the ambition that the new Nepalese government has demonstrated in wanting to see a future for Nepal that is putting Nepal much more on the world stage in terms of industrial partnerships, growth and ambition. And it is the reason why I will also reference the the ambitions of my hon. Friend the member for Harrow West, in his call for a British Nepal Investment Conference, and I hope that that can be taken away by the Minister from the Foreign Office in discussion to also have with the Department for business, innovation, Science and Technology.
But if I can just reference the ambitions of the government, which was so. I was so pleased to be able to discuss with them on one of the first ministerial visits to Nepal after the. The elections, where it was important to recognise that the Nepal economy had been growing from 2% in 2023 to 3.7% by 3.7% in 2024, 4.4% in 2025, and had has aspirations to grow to have have an an average real economic growth rate of 7% over the next decade.
And , and so that data as well, historic data from the world Bank and the aspiration that has also been underpinned by fundamental restructuring of economic incentives. Intentions to simplify the business environment in Nepal, to also attract more domestic, foreign and diaspora investment. You know, this sense of ambition, also of reform to the tax regime and digital economy reforms is, is, is really, I think, also was mentioned and set out in detail in an article in May of Rising Nepal, which was in an English language newspaper in Nepal.
And I think to recognise what the Foreign Minister was also saying at this time, thinking about the the immense potential that Nepal has also around clean energy production and, and looking at agriculture and tourism and industry, information technology, human capital. These were subjects of my dialogue as well in Nepal and also the conversations I've had with my the diaspora communities here in the United Kingdom. And I say this because with all of that ambition, that's an important backdrop for the conversations that we are having, because it is to recognise that as we come together, it is so important to support the recovery which is to be which will have long term implications as well in Nepal following the devastating floods.
But to keep our focus as well on how we support a greater resilience in Nepal, also picking up on points raised by honourable members about how we can see Nepal have a programme for stronger resilience, for disaster prediction, for understanding the data that might be specific to the environment, which is for all, for what we with what we know, with the Himalayas and with Nepal being a global destination and a very unique spot that is important not just for, for, for leisure and for resilience and mountaineering, but also for spiritual retreats and to recognise its very unique place and, and natural assets that mean that it's open for partnerships around the world and one that aligns so much with our own aspirations around clean and green energy and supporting that transformation, not just in the United Kingdom with our ambitious targets, but also our leadership across the world, and to support countries where we can see that there is great potential and opportunity that requires investment and capability, support from across the world.
So I would like to also understand, as a second question from the minister, what work we are doing to support investment to ensure greater resilience, and I am grateful for the conversations I've had with scientists in Nepal about this and where they see great potential for how British scientists, universities can be part of that story for Nepal's future. And if there is anything that we have learned from this, and also the the, the the contributions from honourable members about where there have also been more recent natural disasters and the risk of those that are shared, that it is a project that we should be looking at with greater urgency, and it will require I would I would certainly suspect, international finance for the bigger scale projects and to do that with scientists, partnerships, scientific partnerships around the world as well.
Now, my constituents have also raised with me the importance of keeping climate change on the agenda. It is so important that we don't just look at short term, short term politics, whether that's in the UK or it's in the US, we have got to look at the underlying direction of travel that we must continue to take on tackling climate change, because what Nepalese Nepalese community have said to me is that Nepal hasn't contributed to climate change, and yet they suffer in the way that they have and that that risk will continue unless we also take continue that global leadership as an international community on making sure that we take climate change seriously and that we tackle we both tackle the and prevent climate change, but also put in place resilience for tackling the impacts of it.
But may I also just come to some of the UK's response, for which I am grateful. And the £5 million that was immediately announced. There has been an important part of deploying our UK. The UK's wider response to the flooding and the support that it. That it's brought with the combination of UN, Red cross and NGO interventions. Some of that humanitarian support has been absolutely critical, but it is also the case that.
It is also the case that there is important work that must continue in how we support regions that haven't had the investment now to recover constituents that are from the area, those who have been one of whom has been a civil engineer in in hydropower, who's whose own colleagues were affected, has has raised with me about the importance of building bridges, roads, and also making sure that we've got safeguarding for young people, children, children, children who have lost their parents.
What I will say , as I as I wrap up miss McVay, is that the recovery and relief efforts, the humanitarian efforts, the road building, the bridge, building, the safeguarding of children are issues that have been raised. And if the minister doesn't mind, I will be writing to the minister on that, and particularly the affected areas of Typekit Soleil and Kiss Bang Rural Municipality that my constituents have raised with me. Thank you, miss McVay.
10:28
10:28
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
Thank you, miss McVay. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairship. And I pay tribute to the honourable member for Redding Central Central for bringing forward this debate about our support for a country that is a friend and an ally, and to whom we owe gratitude over more than 200 years. I want to start by adding my condolences to the families and friends of all of those who have lost their lives or remain missing in Nepal and Tibet, both during the August floods and in the floods in Nepal over the weekend.
And I also want to pay tribute to the UK rapid Deployment team and humanitarian crisis response specialists who have supported both British nationals and the wider crisis response to the floods in Nepal. These brave and skilled teams are a clear example of the UK's world leading excellence and expertise. The news may have moved on, but the people of Nepal are faced with rebuilding their country, all while experts note that disasters like this may become more frequent in the region in the coming years.
Indeed, the UK government's own National security assessment of global Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse cites severe degradation or collapse of the Himalayas as particularly significant. The UK National security. The UK. The August floods were not unexpected. Nepal's mountains are warming rapidly. In 2023, the UN secretary general reported that they had lost almost a third of their ice in just over three decades. The wider Hindu Kush Himalaya region is also warming significantly faster than the global average.
All the while, international agreement founders when it comes to action that truly meets the moment, rebuilding comes at a great financial cost. The government of Nepal has written to the UN Loss and Damage Fund to request $20 million, which is 0.7% of the reported 2.7 billion it has estimated in physical damage to infrastructure and economic losses. The loss and damage fund itself is suffering from a lack of finance. It has reportedly already received requests totalling $2.8 billion from 119 countries, but only $400 million has been given by the international donor community.
The demand vastly outstrips the supply, and with the impact of climate change only intensifying, and with the super El Nino in the process of biting, it is deplorable that the international community continues to fail when it comes to preparing for these climate shocks. And while I very much welcome the rapid deployment of UK personnel and the £5 million in humanitarian aid to the crisis, that 5 million is not enough and it does not reflect the closeness of our relationship with Nepal, and I remain deeply concerned about the wider UK aid budget, which has been slashed to 0.3%, and this includes the cutting of the UK humanitarian crisis reserve by 12%, from £85 million to £75 million, leaving less flexible money for rapid support in humanitarian emergencies.
Cutting the humanitarian crisis reserve at a time when many of the world's poorest countries, and, incidentally, the ones which are often most vulnerable to the impact of climate change, are dealing with these impacts, is strategically illiterate. And at this point, I ask the minister, as I have before, when the government will set out a roadmap for the return to 0.7% of GNI on Oda, and will the government revisit this? Cut to the humanitarian crisis reserve. Climate finance has also been cut, a halving of the UK commitment to the Green Climate Fund, and a significant cut to our international climate finance.
Despite an ambitious new government strategy chair, the reality does not match the rhetoric. It is also a matter of national security for us here at home. As I have alluded to, the National Security assessment of global biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse is brutal in its assessment of the impact on our national security and our prosperity. With crop failures, intensified natural disasters and infectious disease outbreaks, it points out the critical ecosystems that support major global food production areas and impact global climate, water and weather cycles, and their importance, including the Himalayas.
How their degradation and collapse will lead to water insecurity, severely reduced crop yields, fisheries collapse, changes to global weather patterns, release of trapped carbon exacerbating climate change, novel disease and loss of pharmaceutical responses. It will drive migration, serious and organised crime, black markets and scarce food, pharmaceuticals, critical minerals, non-state actors gaining control over scarce resources as well as pandemic risks. And as instability grows, it leads to conflict and military escalation.
Wider development finance can provide some solutions, but definitive action on debt sustainability, illicit financial flows and reform of the multilateral development banks is necessary, given the countries most vulnerable to climate change are often also vulnerable to debt distress. It is imperative that the government uses its upcoming G20 presidency to take real and meaningful action on these issues, as well as charting a course forward on climate finance. This is, after all, a fairness issue, a justice issue. Nepal is responsible for only 0.1% of global emissions, yet it is bearing the consequences of runaway carbon emissions and global inaction in tackling them.
As the
And I also want to pay tribute to the UK rapid Deployment team and humanitarian crisis response specialists who have supported both British nationals and the wider crisis response to the floods in Nepal. These brave and skilled teams are a clear example of the UK's world leading excellence and expertise. The news may have moved on, but the people of Nepal are faced with rebuilding their country, all while experts note that disasters like this may become more frequent in the region in the coming years.
Indeed, the UK government's own National security assessment of global Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse cites severe degradation or collapse of the Himalayas as particularly significant. The UK National security. The UK. The August floods were not unexpected. Nepal's mountains are warming rapidly. In 2023, the UN secretary general reported that they had lost almost a third of their ice in just over three decades. The wider Hindu Kush Himalaya region is also warming significantly faster than the global average.
All the while, international agreement founders when it comes to action that truly meets the moment, rebuilding comes at a great financial cost. The government of Nepal has written to the UN Loss and Damage Fund to request $20 million, which is 0.7% of the reported 2.7 billion it has estimated in physical damage to infrastructure and economic losses. The loss and damage fund itself is suffering from a lack of finance. It has reportedly already received requests totalling $2.8 billion from 119 countries, but only $400 million has been given by the international donor community.
The demand vastly outstrips the supply, and with the impact of climate change only intensifying, and with the super El Nino in the process of biting, it is deplorable that the international community continues to fail when it comes to preparing for these climate shocks. And while I very much welcome the rapid deployment of UK personnel and the £5 million in humanitarian aid to the crisis, that 5 million is not enough and it does not reflect the closeness of our relationship with Nepal, and I remain deeply concerned about the wider UK aid budget, which has been slashed to 0.3%, and this includes the cutting of the UK humanitarian crisis reserve by 12%, from £85 million to £75 million, leaving less flexible money for rapid support in humanitarian emergencies.
Cutting the humanitarian crisis reserve at a time when many of the world's poorest countries, and, incidentally, the ones which are often most vulnerable to the impact of climate change, are dealing with these impacts, is strategically illiterate. And at this point, I ask the minister, as I have before, when the government will set out a roadmap for the return to 0.7% of GNI on Oda, and will the government revisit this? Cut to the humanitarian crisis reserve. Climate finance has also been cut, a halving of the UK commitment to the Green Climate Fund, and a significant cut to our international climate finance.
Despite an ambitious new government strategy chair, the reality does not match the rhetoric. It is also a matter of national security for us here at home. As I have alluded to, the National Security assessment of global biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse is brutal in its assessment of the impact on our national security and our prosperity. With crop failures, intensified natural disasters and infectious disease outbreaks, it points out the critical ecosystems that support major global food production areas and impact global climate, water and weather cycles, and their importance, including the Himalayas.
How their degradation and collapse will lead to water insecurity, severely reduced crop yields, fisheries collapse, changes to global weather patterns, release of trapped carbon exacerbating climate change, novel disease and loss of pharmaceutical responses. It will drive migration, serious and organised crime, black markets and scarce food, pharmaceuticals, critical minerals, non-state actors gaining control over scarce resources as well as pandemic risks. And as instability grows, it leads to conflict and military escalation.
Wider development finance can provide some solutions, but definitive action on debt sustainability, illicit financial flows and reform of the multilateral development banks is necessary, given the countries most vulnerable to climate change are often also vulnerable to debt distress. It is imperative that the government uses its upcoming G20 presidency to take real and meaningful action on these issues, as well as charting a course forward on climate finance. This is, after all, a fairness issue, a justice issue. Nepal is responsible for only 0.1% of global emissions, yet it is bearing the consequences of runaway carbon emissions and global inaction in tackling them.
As the
10:34
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Runaway carbon emissions and global inaction in tackling them. As the Nepali Prime Minister said at the recent UN General Assembly. Countries like Nepal are hit by the climate. We did not warm and hit again by the wars. We did not start. What does fairness look like? Estimates that we heard at the. At the International Development Committee, of which I am. Sit on, but the UK's fair share of ICF.
As the world's sixth largest economy and fifth largest historical emitter at £9 billion a year. Add in inflation and the changes to the government's accounting methodology and the odor element of ICF for. Diverges even further from the UK's fair share. With all these factors are. ICF allocation sits roughly 50% lower compared to IC. Three. Failure to tackle the climate crisis will erode development gains and push more people into humanitarian need and resource competition, and into a vicious cycle of poverty and instability.
And, of course, damage the UK's reputation as a leader in the climate space and a leader in the development space. And with Cop 31 fast approaching, what will be the government's strategy for real and meaningful action at this Cop? How will the Foreign Secretary go beyond words to action that is reflected in tangible UK commitments, both domestically and globally? The floods in Nepal have shown us what can happen and what will continue to happen if we do not act.
And there is still time to take action. World Bank research estimates that climate change could force 216 million people to move within their countries by 2050, but that immediate action to reduce global emissions could reduce this by up to 80%. So I urge the minister and the government today to take that action by taking bold steps now with our development and climate strategy, with our aid and with our G20 presidency, so that the catastrophe in Nepal does not become the norm for communities everywhere.
The UK has an opportunity to lead and we should take it.
As the world's sixth largest economy and fifth largest historical emitter at £9 billion a year. Add in inflation and the changes to the government's accounting methodology and the odor element of ICF for. Diverges even further from the UK's fair share. With all these factors are. ICF allocation sits roughly 50% lower compared to IC. Three. Failure to tackle the climate crisis will erode development gains and push more people into humanitarian need and resource competition, and into a vicious cycle of poverty and instability.
And, of course, damage the UK's reputation as a leader in the climate space and a leader in the development space. And with Cop 31 fast approaching, what will be the government's strategy for real and meaningful action at this Cop? How will the Foreign Secretary go beyond words to action that is reflected in tangible UK commitments, both domestically and globally? The floods in Nepal have shown us what can happen and what will continue to happen if we do not act.
And there is still time to take action. World Bank research estimates that climate change could force 216 million people to move within their countries by 2050, but that immediate action to reduce global emissions could reduce this by up to 80%. So I urge the minister and the government today to take that action by taking bold steps now with our development and climate strategy, with our aid and with our G20 presidency, so that the catastrophe in Nepal does not become the norm for communities everywhere.
The UK has an opportunity to lead and we should take it.
10:36
10:36
Speaker 11
-
Speaker 11
Thank you, Mr. McVeigh, and it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today. And I congratulate the honourable member for Reading Central on securing this important and timely debate. The devastating floods that struck Nepal on the 26th of August have brought unimaginable suffering to communities across the country. More than 1400 people have lost their lives. Thousands remain missing and entire communities have been swept away. Homes, roads, bridges and vital infrastructure have been destroyed, leaving families displaced and livelihoods devastated.
Now, on behalf of His Majesty's loyal opposition, I would extend my deepest condolences to the people of Nepal, to those that have lost loved ones and to everyone still waiting for news of missing family members. I also extend our condolences to the people impacted by far the further flash floods over the last few days. Our thoughts are particularly with the families of British nationals who remain unaccounted for after the August floods. I visited Nepal last year on a visit, and I saw just how deep and enduring the ties between Britain and Nepal are, and visiting some of the communities that had been devastated by horrible events in years gone by.
To see the fear in those communities really brought home the effect that these events have, and trying to get our minds in as British nationals who don't really see these events is quite difficult to do. But we must try. Our relationship has been forged with Nepal through generations of friendship, and a number of members have talked very powerfully about that today. Shared service and the extraordinary contributions of the Gurkhas and serving in the military with a number of Gurkhas.
I saw how kind, honest and what a hardy people the Gurkhas were. And we've had a number of brilliant contributions today, very prescient contributions, starting with the honourable member for central. He really brought it home. It's difficult to comprehend these types of numbers, but 84,000 people affected with 32 of thousand of those being children. And he spoke again very powerfully about the deep friendship that we share with Nepal.
The honourable member for Strangford. Talked about the fact that in these periods of devastation, we can often see humanity at its best. And to hear about his community and the various faith groups raising money for. For this tragedy, I commend. I commend his constituents. The Right Honourable Member for Oxford East and the honourable member for Harrow West, both deep experts in this field, both former international development ministers, really brought home the point about the effects of anthropogenic climate change.
We are seeing the effects, and although it might not be globally equitable at the moment, countries like Nepal are really experiencing it and we have to do our work here in the UK to make sure that on the international stage, we are pushing big emitters to bring down global carbon emissions, to reduce the effects that we're seeing in places like Nepal at the moment. The honourable member for Basingstoke talked about acts of heroism, both large and small, both in in country, in Nepal and back here at home.
And the honourable member for Feltham and Heston raised an interesting point, something that I saw on my trip to Nepal last year, obviously, with Nepal being wedged between India and China and both countries having significant development output into Nepal. It's important we do work with those two countries to make sure that we're not duplicating efforts or working towards. Offset goals. At moments such as this, those bonds of friendship matter enormously. And I want to acknowledge the work undertaken by the British Embassy in Kathmandu.
Our consular teams, humanitarian organisations and emergency responders who have worked tirelessly in exceptionally difficult circumstances. The government was right to provide every possible support to British nationals and their families, while working closely with the Nepalese authorities and search and rescue teams. We welcome the deployment of the UK's rapid deployment Team and the announcement of £5 million in emergency humanitarian assistance. However, Mr. McVeigh, the situation has now entered a particularly difficult and distressing new phase following the decision by the Nepalese government to end formal search and rescue operations.
Thousands of families are left without answers about the fate of their loved ones. I would therefore be grateful if the minister could address several questions. First on British nationals. Reports indicate that 33 British citizens still remain missing. Can the Minister confirm the latest verified figure and explain what further consular and diplomatic steps are being taken to establish their whereabouts? What representation has been made with the Nepalese authorities following the decision to end formal search operations, and what arrangements are in place to ensure that any human remains discovered during reconstruction are properly identified and families informed.
Second, on support for families, many face painful uncertainty of not knowing what happened to their loved ones, compounded by the complex legal and administrative processes surrounding missing persons and death certificates. What practical assistance is the Fcdo providing to help British families navigate these processes? Well, dedicated consular support and family liaison arrangements remain in place for as long as they are needed. And thirdly, on the humanitarian response, can the Minister update on the delivery of the 5 million emergency assistance package? How much has been disbursed? What assessment has been made of its effectiveness? And how is the government ensuring that assistance reaches isolated communities, particularly those in the affected valleys, where damaged infrastructure continues to hinder access? And another valuable point was raised.
We met the Gurkha Foundation when we were in Nepal, and to see the work that they do to go out into really remote areas, to make sure that Gurkhas that have served the UK military receive their pensions is paramount and there needs to be work across the Fcdo and the Mod to make sure that that work is still happening. We would also welcome clarification on whether British humanitarian specialists remain deployed, and what further assistance is being done to consider Nepal as they move towards recovery and reconstruction.
As ever, it's right that Britain responds to such devastating and exceptional circumstances. The scale of which is almost unimaginable to us here in the UK. Our country has a proud tradition of standing alongside international and close friends, and we've made the case for that repeatedly today. In a time of crisis, that responsibility, we should continue to take that very seriously. But equally, it's right that His Majesty's official opposition ask these questions of the government not to diminish the importance of the support being provided, but to ensure that there is clarity about the government's priority transparency and about British assistance and how it's being delivered and the accountability for the outcomes.
It achieves. In a crisis of this magnitude, it's essential that assistance is properly targeted, that it reaches those in greatest need, and that there is clear understanding of how requirements are changing and the immediate emergency gives way to recovery. Can the minister therefore set out how the Fcdo is assessing the effectiveness of the UK's response, and what criteria will inform decisions about any further assistance, particularly in light of the renewed flooding? Ultimately, Mr.
McVey, our response must be judged not simply by the money committed, but by the difference it makes to those affected. And ultimately our response must be judged not simply by the money committed, but by the difference it makes to those affected. I will conclude by reaffirming the opposition's solidarity with the people of Nepal. Britain has a proud and long standing and close friendship with Nepal. We must continue to stand alongside its people through this tragedy and the aftermath.
I hope the Minister can provide the reassurance that British families and the wider Nepalese community so desperately need.
Now, on behalf of His Majesty's loyal opposition, I would extend my deepest condolences to the people of Nepal, to those that have lost loved ones and to everyone still waiting for news of missing family members. I also extend our condolences to the people impacted by far the further flash floods over the last few days. Our thoughts are particularly with the families of British nationals who remain unaccounted for after the August floods. I visited Nepal last year on a visit, and I saw just how deep and enduring the ties between Britain and Nepal are, and visiting some of the communities that had been devastated by horrible events in years gone by.
To see the fear in those communities really brought home the effect that these events have, and trying to get our minds in as British nationals who don't really see these events is quite difficult to do. But we must try. Our relationship has been forged with Nepal through generations of friendship, and a number of members have talked very powerfully about that today. Shared service and the extraordinary contributions of the Gurkhas and serving in the military with a number of Gurkhas.
I saw how kind, honest and what a hardy people the Gurkhas were. And we've had a number of brilliant contributions today, very prescient contributions, starting with the honourable member for central. He really brought it home. It's difficult to comprehend these types of numbers, but 84,000 people affected with 32 of thousand of those being children. And he spoke again very powerfully about the deep friendship that we share with Nepal.
The honourable member for Strangford. Talked about the fact that in these periods of devastation, we can often see humanity at its best. And to hear about his community and the various faith groups raising money for. For this tragedy, I commend. I commend his constituents. The Right Honourable Member for Oxford East and the honourable member for Harrow West, both deep experts in this field, both former international development ministers, really brought home the point about the effects of anthropogenic climate change.
We are seeing the effects, and although it might not be globally equitable at the moment, countries like Nepal are really experiencing it and we have to do our work here in the UK to make sure that on the international stage, we are pushing big emitters to bring down global carbon emissions, to reduce the effects that we're seeing in places like Nepal at the moment. The honourable member for Basingstoke talked about acts of heroism, both large and small, both in in country, in Nepal and back here at home.
And the honourable member for Feltham and Heston raised an interesting point, something that I saw on my trip to Nepal last year, obviously, with Nepal being wedged between India and China and both countries having significant development output into Nepal. It's important we do work with those two countries to make sure that we're not duplicating efforts or working towards. Offset goals. At moments such as this, those bonds of friendship matter enormously. And I want to acknowledge the work undertaken by the British Embassy in Kathmandu.
Our consular teams, humanitarian organisations and emergency responders who have worked tirelessly in exceptionally difficult circumstances. The government was right to provide every possible support to British nationals and their families, while working closely with the Nepalese authorities and search and rescue teams. We welcome the deployment of the UK's rapid deployment Team and the announcement of £5 million in emergency humanitarian assistance. However, Mr. McVeigh, the situation has now entered a particularly difficult and distressing new phase following the decision by the Nepalese government to end formal search and rescue operations.
Thousands of families are left without answers about the fate of their loved ones. I would therefore be grateful if the minister could address several questions. First on British nationals. Reports indicate that 33 British citizens still remain missing. Can the Minister confirm the latest verified figure and explain what further consular and diplomatic steps are being taken to establish their whereabouts? What representation has been made with the Nepalese authorities following the decision to end formal search operations, and what arrangements are in place to ensure that any human remains discovered during reconstruction are properly identified and families informed.
Second, on support for families, many face painful uncertainty of not knowing what happened to their loved ones, compounded by the complex legal and administrative processes surrounding missing persons and death certificates. What practical assistance is the Fcdo providing to help British families navigate these processes? Well, dedicated consular support and family liaison arrangements remain in place for as long as they are needed. And thirdly, on the humanitarian response, can the Minister update on the delivery of the 5 million emergency assistance package? How much has been disbursed? What assessment has been made of its effectiveness? And how is the government ensuring that assistance reaches isolated communities, particularly those in the affected valleys, where damaged infrastructure continues to hinder access? And another valuable point was raised.
We met the Gurkha Foundation when we were in Nepal, and to see the work that they do to go out into really remote areas, to make sure that Gurkhas that have served the UK military receive their pensions is paramount and there needs to be work across the Fcdo and the Mod to make sure that that work is still happening. We would also welcome clarification on whether British humanitarian specialists remain deployed, and what further assistance is being done to consider Nepal as they move towards recovery and reconstruction.
As ever, it's right that Britain responds to such devastating and exceptional circumstances. The scale of which is almost unimaginable to us here in the UK. Our country has a proud tradition of standing alongside international and close friends, and we've made the case for that repeatedly today. In a time of crisis, that responsibility, we should continue to take that very seriously. But equally, it's right that His Majesty's official opposition ask these questions of the government not to diminish the importance of the support being provided, but to ensure that there is clarity about the government's priority transparency and about British assistance and how it's being delivered and the accountability for the outcomes.
It achieves. In a crisis of this magnitude, it's essential that assistance is properly targeted, that it reaches those in greatest need, and that there is clear understanding of how requirements are changing and the immediate emergency gives way to recovery. Can the minister therefore set out how the Fcdo is assessing the effectiveness of the UK's response, and what criteria will inform decisions about any further assistance, particularly in light of the renewed flooding? Ultimately, Mr.
McVey, our response must be judged not simply by the money committed, but by the difference it makes to those affected. And ultimately our response must be judged not simply by the money committed, but by the difference it makes to those affected. I will conclude by reaffirming the opposition's solidarity with the people of Nepal. Britain has a proud and long standing and close friendship with Nepal. We must continue to stand alongside its people through this tragedy and the aftermath.
I hope the Minister can provide the reassurance that British families and the wider Nepalese community so desperately need.
10:45
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
Thank you, Mr. McVey. It's a pleasure. I think for the first time to serve under your under your chairmanship. I'm grateful to my hon. Friend the member for Redding Central for securing this debate to discuss the devastating floods that struck Nepal in August. I also thank right, honourable and honourable members for their contributions today , for what I think has been a thoughtful and well-informed debate in the way in which we've spoken about the impact of this tragedy on the people of Nepal and on the communities here in the United Kingdom.
May I also, miss McVeigh pay my own tribute to the British Nepali community in the UK? Our longstanding friendship is one that we are deeply proud of and something that I pay tribute to, not just to the people here today, but across our communities in the United Kingdom. The UK stands with Nepal in its time of grief. Our deepest condolences are with those who have lost loved ones and their livelihoods. The scale of this tragedy has been immense.
Thousands of families have been affected, communities destroyed and critical infrastructure damaged across some of Nepal's most vulnerable regions. More than 1455 people have tragically lost their lives, including British nationals, and many more remain missing. Our thoughts are with the thousands of Nepalis living in the UK, who have watched events unfold with deep concern and personal anguish, and I am sure members, as they have done across today's debate, will join me in acknowledging the dedication of search and rescue teams, emergency responders and volunteers who have worked tirelessly in extremely challenging conditions.
Against that backdrop, the United Kingdom moved quickly to support those affected. An Fcdo Rapid Deployment team supported the consular response in the region. We are coordinating closely with Napoli and Chinese authorities, whilst specialist Police Family Liaison officers are supporting British families in the UK. We also announced, as many members have made reference to £5 million in humanitarian support assistance to support the immediate relief efforts. That funding is helping trusted humanitarian partners provide emergency shelter, clean water and sanitation services, protection support, health assistance and other life saving interventions for those affected by the floods.
And to answer one of the Shadow Minister's questions, that is how we are tracking the funding through these trusted UN partners and making sure that money is going to where it is needed. Humanitarian and engineering experts have also supported the response and assessment effort. But I would also like to recognise in particular, the remarkable response from the government and people of Nepal. Faced with one of the most devastating disasters in the country's recent history.
Nepal's authorities mobilised rescue operations at scale, supported displaced communities and began the immense task of recovery and reconstruction. We pay tribute to the professionalism, resilience and determination in answering some members questions. As I go through my speech, I start with the honourable gentleman for Strangford. I thank him for his warm words about me. I. They are reciprocal. He is. He is a constant force in this House and a constant advocate around freedom of religion and belief, and can I assure him that he knows of my personal commitment in this particular area of policy as the responsible Minister, but also that we do work when humanitarian aid is delivered.
Nepal is officially a secular country, but to reassure him, we do offer support to communities, including Christian communities, to make sure that the funding that we are allocating and the aid that we are allocating receives in the correct way and through different communities to give him that reassurance. The UK and Nepal have a long standing partnership on climate action and many members, including my right hon. Friend for Oxford East, Harrow West and Basingstoke have mentioned today the need for us to have more collaboration in this space, both bilaterally but also multilaterally in Nepal.
The global and globally, climate change is increasingly becoming a national security issue, which has been at the forefront of the new Foreign Secretary's focus melting Himalayan glaciers and more extreme weather across Hindu Kush. Himalayas are driving cascading disasters and threatens lives, infrastructure, energy systems and economic growth. The recent Ratua Bar-joseph. I hope I said that right. Floods showed how a single climate related event can disrupt trade, hydropower, transport and livelihoods simultaneously.
And in answer in particular to my hon. Friend the member for Oxford East and honourable friend from Harrow West, about this whole position of working through climate resilience and disaster resilience. The UK government believes this is absolutely central to how we deliver reconstruction, but also how we build our partnership with Nepal, but not just on reconstruction, on science, on modelling, on engineering and actually on practical hazard, intelligence and resilience. So I can assure all members across the House that the next steps of where we're working bilaterally, but also multilaterally, is on this period of recovery and how we can build resilient infrastructure.
And I will go further into my speech and actually how we can work multilaterally in the international financial systems on offering more support on wider reconstruction. As climate shocks become more frequent and unpredictable, they risk eroding. Hard won development gains has been mentioned by members, increasing vulnerability and imposing significant economic costs. My hon. Friend the member for Reading Central and Harrow West particularly challenged me on the positions of climate not just being something that happens in coastal communities, but obviously countries that are impacted by melting glaciers and the wider challenges of climate change.
And for Nepal, this could not be more stark. Nepal is a mountainous country. Climate resilience is therefore not just an environmental priority, but a foundation for future prosperity and stability. And that is why we are repositioning elements of our development partnership to support Nepal's recovery and resilience agenda. And my hon. Friend the member for Feltham and Heston. I pay tribute to her work in the Foreign Office. As a former Asia Pacific minister, is right to highlight some of the challenges that we now must put in the multilateral space, and that my right hon.
Friend for Oxford East also challenged me on around multi development banks and the international financial institutions. And the Liberal Democrat spokesperson challenged me around words to action. And that is why I am very pleased to confirm to the House that the Foreign Secretary announced on the 24th of September, during the UN high level week and convened a multilateral meeting of ministers from Australia, Kenya and across the European Union that a specific fund from the UK government of £333 million to specifically fund climate driven instability and project resilience for vulnerable communities that are impacted by climate change.
And of course, this could and will apply to countries including Nepal. The reality is that no bilateral donor can finance construction and scale required, and my hon. Friend the member for Basingstoke mentioned about the world Bank, and indeed, the world Bank has estimated that damage and reconstruction costs run into billions of US dollars, and our role is therefore not to simply provide aid, but to help shape much larger flows of international finance.
And the Foreign Secretary has made clear that climate and development finance must increasingly focus on preparedness and resilience through our engagement with the world Bank, the Asian Development Bank and other institutions, we are encouraging approaches that the that the invest earlier in resilience, early warning systems and disaster risk, finance and climate adaptation are key to how we move our work forward internationally. I will briefly.
May I also, miss McVeigh pay my own tribute to the British Nepali community in the UK? Our longstanding friendship is one that we are deeply proud of and something that I pay tribute to, not just to the people here today, but across our communities in the United Kingdom. The UK stands with Nepal in its time of grief. Our deepest condolences are with those who have lost loved ones and their livelihoods. The scale of this tragedy has been immense.
Thousands of families have been affected, communities destroyed and critical infrastructure damaged across some of Nepal's most vulnerable regions. More than 1455 people have tragically lost their lives, including British nationals, and many more remain missing. Our thoughts are with the thousands of Nepalis living in the UK, who have watched events unfold with deep concern and personal anguish, and I am sure members, as they have done across today's debate, will join me in acknowledging the dedication of search and rescue teams, emergency responders and volunteers who have worked tirelessly in extremely challenging conditions.
Against that backdrop, the United Kingdom moved quickly to support those affected. An Fcdo Rapid Deployment team supported the consular response in the region. We are coordinating closely with Napoli and Chinese authorities, whilst specialist Police Family Liaison officers are supporting British families in the UK. We also announced, as many members have made reference to £5 million in humanitarian support assistance to support the immediate relief efforts. That funding is helping trusted humanitarian partners provide emergency shelter, clean water and sanitation services, protection support, health assistance and other life saving interventions for those affected by the floods.
And to answer one of the Shadow Minister's questions, that is how we are tracking the funding through these trusted UN partners and making sure that money is going to where it is needed. Humanitarian and engineering experts have also supported the response and assessment effort. But I would also like to recognise in particular, the remarkable response from the government and people of Nepal. Faced with one of the most devastating disasters in the country's recent history.
Nepal's authorities mobilised rescue operations at scale, supported displaced communities and began the immense task of recovery and reconstruction. We pay tribute to the professionalism, resilience and determination in answering some members questions. As I go through my speech, I start with the honourable gentleman for Strangford. I thank him for his warm words about me. I. They are reciprocal. He is. He is a constant force in this House and a constant advocate around freedom of religion and belief, and can I assure him that he knows of my personal commitment in this particular area of policy as the responsible Minister, but also that we do work when humanitarian aid is delivered.
Nepal is officially a secular country, but to reassure him, we do offer support to communities, including Christian communities, to make sure that the funding that we are allocating and the aid that we are allocating receives in the correct way and through different communities to give him that reassurance. The UK and Nepal have a long standing partnership on climate action and many members, including my right hon. Friend for Oxford East, Harrow West and Basingstoke have mentioned today the need for us to have more collaboration in this space, both bilaterally but also multilaterally in Nepal.
The global and globally, climate change is increasingly becoming a national security issue, which has been at the forefront of the new Foreign Secretary's focus melting Himalayan glaciers and more extreme weather across Hindu Kush. Himalayas are driving cascading disasters and threatens lives, infrastructure, energy systems and economic growth. The recent Ratua Bar-joseph. I hope I said that right. Floods showed how a single climate related event can disrupt trade, hydropower, transport and livelihoods simultaneously.
And in answer in particular to my hon. Friend the member for Oxford East and honourable friend from Harrow West, about this whole position of working through climate resilience and disaster resilience. The UK government believes this is absolutely central to how we deliver reconstruction, but also how we build our partnership with Nepal, but not just on reconstruction, on science, on modelling, on engineering and actually on practical hazard, intelligence and resilience. So I can assure all members across the House that the next steps of where we're working bilaterally, but also multilaterally, is on this period of recovery and how we can build resilient infrastructure.
And I will go further into my speech and actually how we can work multilaterally in the international financial systems on offering more support on wider reconstruction. As climate shocks become more frequent and unpredictable, they risk eroding. Hard won development gains has been mentioned by members, increasing vulnerability and imposing significant economic costs. My hon. Friend the member for Reading Central and Harrow West particularly challenged me on the positions of climate not just being something that happens in coastal communities, but obviously countries that are impacted by melting glaciers and the wider challenges of climate change.
And for Nepal, this could not be more stark. Nepal is a mountainous country. Climate resilience is therefore not just an environmental priority, but a foundation for future prosperity and stability. And that is why we are repositioning elements of our development partnership to support Nepal's recovery and resilience agenda. And my hon. Friend the member for Feltham and Heston. I pay tribute to her work in the Foreign Office. As a former Asia Pacific minister, is right to highlight some of the challenges that we now must put in the multilateral space, and that my right hon.
Friend for Oxford East also challenged me on around multi development banks and the international financial institutions. And the Liberal Democrat spokesperson challenged me around words to action. And that is why I am very pleased to confirm to the House that the Foreign Secretary announced on the 24th of September, during the UN high level week and convened a multilateral meeting of ministers from Australia, Kenya and across the European Union that a specific fund from the UK government of £333 million to specifically fund climate driven instability and project resilience for vulnerable communities that are impacted by climate change.
And of course, this could and will apply to countries including Nepal. The reality is that no bilateral donor can finance construction and scale required, and my hon. Friend the member for Basingstoke mentioned about the world Bank, and indeed, the world Bank has estimated that damage and reconstruction costs run into billions of US dollars, and our role is therefore not to simply provide aid, but to help shape much larger flows of international finance.
And the Foreign Secretary has made clear that climate and development finance must increasingly focus on preparedness and resilience through our engagement with the world Bank, the Asian Development Bank and other institutions, we are encouraging approaches that the that the invest earlier in resilience, early warning systems and disaster risk, finance and climate adaptation are key to how we move our work forward internationally. I will briefly.
10:52
10:53
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
I think it's an absolute focus, and I'll go slightly further into my speech with the Foreign Secretary's in the world Bank this week, and hopefully we'll try and answer her point in slightly more detail. We want international financing systems to become better at helping countries at risk prepare for foreseeable climate shocks. This has been an important part of the United Kingdom's engagement with the United Nations General Assembly in September, and I personally was pleased to meet with the Nepalese Foreign Minister to discuss some of the challenges that they are now experiencing post the this climate event and how we can work more collaboratively moving forward.
The Foreign Secretary highlighted the strong links between environmental pressures, climate vulnerability and broader security and stability challenges, and the world Bank annual meetings this week provide another opportunity to advance progress on this agenda, and the Foreign Secretary will speak alongside Nepal's Finance Minister to highlight the UK support for strengthening hazard intelligence and early warning systems in Nepal and ensuring that crisis financing is available when countries need it most. So to answer the Liberal Democrat spokesperson's question, I do think so, because it is actually being led by the Foreign Secretary in the world Bank this week with the Nepalese Finance Minister.
Alongside our work through international institutions, we have maintained close engagement with Nepal, with the communities here in the United Kingdom. And many members have raised this today, and rightly so. The Minister for Indo-Pacific visited Nepal, which has been mentioned in the immediate aftermath of the floods, becoming the first foreign ministerial visitor following the disaster, demonstrating the UK's solidarity with Nepal at a at a very difficult moment. And ministers have maintained regular dialogue with Nepalese communities, community leaders, group representatives and the all party parliamentary group who I pay tribute to as our response has evolved.
On the 2nd of September, my colleague the Minister for Consular Services and the member for Cardiff South and Penarth visited the South London Santana Madri in Colston to convey condolences to the affected temple community. My hon. Friend and the Minister for Asia Pacific, Baroness Winterton, also held an online meeting with representatives of the Nepalese diaspora in the UK on the 4th of September to update the on them on UK support. These conversations matter.
The Nepalese community in the UK maintains deep family, cultural and economic ties with Nepal and many have been personally affected by these events. Their experiences, insights and concerns continue to inform our understanding of the situation on the ground and for the support required in the months and years ahead. Many members have paid tribute to the Gurkhas, and I'd like to add my own tribute to them and for their long standing solidarity, not just through our British military, but our shared history across conflicts since the First World War.
And in doing so, I want to come to the point around pensions. I will ensure that every member, including the shadow minister and member for Reading Central, will get a written response from the Ministry of Defence. It is led by the Department, but I will ensure that there is a response given to all honourable and right honourable colleagues in relation specifically to some questions now from members in the time I have left to give my hon. Friend a response.
The. In terms of consular support, I can say that the consular support is ongoing. UK Police Family Liaison officers continue to support affected families in the UK. Where appropriate. I can say that Fcdo officials continue to liaise with Nepalese and Chinese authorities to establish facts and support families, and we are aware of 36 British nationals who remain missing at this time. We do continue to work as progression on reconstruction takes place, to work through what more we can do to support families here in the UK, particularly as the missing are hopefully found.
Can I also just come to some final points, Mr. McVey? Very briefly around trade and investment between Nepal and the UK. Can I reassure my hon. Friends that we are working with Nepal about what is important to them, and I will keep the House updated on that work. So rather than commit to something today, it is an ongoing piece of work that we're doing with Nepal about what works between them. And can I say a moment of crisis? That friendship is underlined not only through words of sympathy, but through practical action, and we will continue to use our voice in multilateral institutions and international forums to ensure that Nepal's needs remain firmly on the international agenda.
The people of Nepal have shown extraordinary courage in the face of immense tragedy, and the United Kingdom stands with them as they begin to rebuild and look to the future. Thank you.
The Foreign Secretary highlighted the strong links between environmental pressures, climate vulnerability and broader security and stability challenges, and the world Bank annual meetings this week provide another opportunity to advance progress on this agenda, and the Foreign Secretary will speak alongside Nepal's Finance Minister to highlight the UK support for strengthening hazard intelligence and early warning systems in Nepal and ensuring that crisis financing is available when countries need it most. So to answer the Liberal Democrat spokesperson's question, I do think so, because it is actually being led by the Foreign Secretary in the world Bank this week with the Nepalese Finance Minister.
Alongside our work through international institutions, we have maintained close engagement with Nepal, with the communities here in the United Kingdom. And many members have raised this today, and rightly so. The Minister for Indo-Pacific visited Nepal, which has been mentioned in the immediate aftermath of the floods, becoming the first foreign ministerial visitor following the disaster, demonstrating the UK's solidarity with Nepal at a at a very difficult moment. And ministers have maintained regular dialogue with Nepalese communities, community leaders, group representatives and the all party parliamentary group who I pay tribute to as our response has evolved.
On the 2nd of September, my colleague the Minister for Consular Services and the member for Cardiff South and Penarth visited the South London Santana Madri in Colston to convey condolences to the affected temple community. My hon. Friend and the Minister for Asia Pacific, Baroness Winterton, also held an online meeting with representatives of the Nepalese diaspora in the UK on the 4th of September to update the on them on UK support. These conversations matter.
The Nepalese community in the UK maintains deep family, cultural and economic ties with Nepal and many have been personally affected by these events. Their experiences, insights and concerns continue to inform our understanding of the situation on the ground and for the support required in the months and years ahead. Many members have paid tribute to the Gurkhas, and I'd like to add my own tribute to them and for their long standing solidarity, not just through our British military, but our shared history across conflicts since the First World War.
And in doing so, I want to come to the point around pensions. I will ensure that every member, including the shadow minister and member for Reading Central, will get a written response from the Ministry of Defence. It is led by the Department, but I will ensure that there is a response given to all honourable and right honourable colleagues in relation specifically to some questions now from members in the time I have left to give my hon. Friend a response.
The. In terms of consular support, I can say that the consular support is ongoing. UK Police Family Liaison officers continue to support affected families in the UK. Where appropriate. I can say that Fcdo officials continue to liaise with Nepalese and Chinese authorities to establish facts and support families, and we are aware of 36 British nationals who remain missing at this time. We do continue to work as progression on reconstruction takes place, to work through what more we can do to support families here in the UK, particularly as the missing are hopefully found.
Can I also just come to some final points, Mr. McVey? Very briefly around trade and investment between Nepal and the UK. Can I reassure my hon. Friends that we are working with Nepal about what is important to them, and I will keep the House updated on that work. So rather than commit to something today, it is an ongoing piece of work that we're doing with Nepal about what works between them. And can I say a moment of crisis? That friendship is underlined not only through words of sympathy, but through practical action, and we will continue to use our voice in multilateral institutions and international forums to ensure that Nepal's needs remain firmly on the international agenda.
The people of Nepal have shown extraordinary courage in the face of immense tragedy, and the United Kingdom stands with them as they begin to rebuild and look to the future. Thank you.
10:57
10:57
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Thank you, Mr. McVeigh, and it's been a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. Could I thank once again the speaker for granting today's debate for the House. Thank the House and also members for speaking today, including the opposition frontbench and the spokeswoman for the Liberal Democrats. I do believe today's debate has raised some very important issues. And like the Prime Minister, I do believe that Nepal has always been there for Britain.
Now Britain has to be there for Nepal, and I was very pleased to hear the minister's response and in particular, the work that's underway this week in the UN and with the world Bank, with the Foreign Secretary working very closely with the Nepalese finance Minister. I do look forward to hearing more details of this and the vital consular and reconstruction work. Thank you. Yeah.
Now Britain has to be there for Nepal, and I was very pleased to hear the minister's response and in particular, the work that's underway this week in the UN and with the world Bank, with the Foreign Secretary working very closely with the Nepalese finance Minister. I do look forward to hearing more details of this and the vital consular and reconstruction work. Thank you. Yeah.
10:58
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Question is that this House has considered government support for the situation in Nepal. As many as of that opinion say I of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Order, order! Dave, can I just check who have you agreed? I will call Dave Robertson to move the motion, and I will then call the minister to respond. I remind other members that they may only make a speech with prior permission from the member in charge of the debate and the Minister.
There will not be an opportunity for the member in charge to wind up, as it is the convention for 30 minute speeches. Order, order! David Robertson to move the motion.
There will not be an opportunity for the member in charge to wind up, as it is the convention for 30 minute speeches. Order, order! David Robertson to move the motion.
11:00
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
Thank you, Mrs. McVey. Always a pleasure to see you in Westminster Hall this morning. And unfortunately I have to start with a bit of an admission which is this thing isn't on. We'll stand next to that one. Unfortunately, I have to start this morning with some bad news and unfortunately it is. The Chetwynd Bridge is falling down, falling down, falling down. And that Chetwynd Bridge is falling down, falling down, falling down.
Now I won't punish honourable and right honourable members in the room with a full rendition of a rewritten nursery rhyme. Nor will I be singing. And because unlike London Bridge or indeed another bridge in our capital, which may be further down the river, Chetwynd Bridge is not especially famous, and it's unlikely to ever be the subject of a song or a nursery rhyme. But that's why I feel today's debate is so important, so that we myself, and I'm sure some colleagues sitting behind me, take the opportunity to impress on the minister the real vital significance of this bridge to communities in Staffordshire and South Derbyshire, and to remind him that, just like in that song, wood and clay will wash away.
Bricks and mortar will not stay, and iron and steel have been bent and bowed. Now I promise that will be the last bit of nursery rhyme we bring in today. But what we know is that Chetwynd Bridge needs a replacement. I'll cover some more of that shortly. But Chetwynd Bridge needs a replacement, and myself and other colleagues have been arguing for the Government's Structures Fund to be used to fund that replacement for a number of months.
And as I said to the minister last night, it's good to see him for one last dance on Chetwynd Bridge. For a little background. For those who are unsure about where Chetwynd Bridge, it crosses the River Tame in Staffordshire, very close to the Derbyshire border, so one end of it sits in my constituency and the other in my honourable friend, the honourable member for Tamworth's constituency. It's also very close by my hon. Friend the member for South Derbyshire's.
It is the oldest cast iron bridge in the country. It is older than Hammersmith Bridge. It's also longer than Hammersmith Bridge. Not that it's a competition, but we are older and longer. It was completed over 200 years ago in 1824. So this year we'll see. It's 202nd birthday. It is grade two listed for many of those reasons, but since 2019, it's been closed to heavy traffic, and options for patching up the structure have been exhausted over decades and decades and decades.
And without that weight limit, the bridge would be at risk of further damage, which could lead to the complete closure and the real economic problems that that would cause for my part of Staffordshire. Oh, how can I how can I say no to the honourable member for Stratford?
Now I won't punish honourable and right honourable members in the room with a full rendition of a rewritten nursery rhyme. Nor will I be singing. And because unlike London Bridge or indeed another bridge in our capital, which may be further down the river, Chetwynd Bridge is not especially famous, and it's unlikely to ever be the subject of a song or a nursery rhyme. But that's why I feel today's debate is so important, so that we myself, and I'm sure some colleagues sitting behind me, take the opportunity to impress on the minister the real vital significance of this bridge to communities in Staffordshire and South Derbyshire, and to remind him that, just like in that song, wood and clay will wash away.
Bricks and mortar will not stay, and iron and steel have been bent and bowed. Now I promise that will be the last bit of nursery rhyme we bring in today. But what we know is that Chetwynd Bridge needs a replacement. I'll cover some more of that shortly. But Chetwynd Bridge needs a replacement, and myself and other colleagues have been arguing for the Government's Structures Fund to be used to fund that replacement for a number of months.
And as I said to the minister last night, it's good to see him for one last dance on Chetwynd Bridge. For a little background. For those who are unsure about where Chetwynd Bridge, it crosses the River Tame in Staffordshire, very close to the Derbyshire border, so one end of it sits in my constituency and the other in my honourable friend, the honourable member for Tamworth's constituency. It's also very close by my hon. Friend the member for South Derbyshire's.
It is the oldest cast iron bridge in the country. It is older than Hammersmith Bridge. It's also longer than Hammersmith Bridge. Not that it's a competition, but we are older and longer. It was completed over 200 years ago in 1824. So this year we'll see. It's 202nd birthday. It is grade two listed for many of those reasons, but since 2019, it's been closed to heavy traffic, and options for patching up the structure have been exhausted over decades and decades and decades.
And without that weight limit, the bridge would be at risk of further damage, which could lead to the complete closure and the real economic problems that that would cause for my part of Staffordshire. Oh, how can I how can I say no to the honourable member for Stratford?
11:02
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Mr. chairman, can I commend the honourable member for bringing this forward? And he's right to raise the issue of historic infrastructure. And much like the grade two listed Chapman Bridge that is referred to suffering under heavy traffic and weight restrictions, isolated communities and hurts local trade? Does the honourable member agree that when local authorities establish our county Council step up with significant multi-million pound funding bid to protect our heritage while building a modern bypass, that government must also ensure that the Structures Fund delivers for those vital arterial routes, so that small businesses and local commuters are not left falling through the cracks.
11:03
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
I hadn't even primed him for that. No, very much appreciate the intervention from the honourable member for Strangford. Later on, I will be talking about some of the businesses and actually the real importance of this as an arterial route in Staffordshire. So if I can beg his indulgence to just hang fire shortly, I will be getting there. The partial closure that the bridge is currently going through, so it is open to some traffic. It's open to to small vehicles, but because of some of the protections that Stafford County Council have had to put in place to prevent heavy goods vehicles using it, it's currently signalised.
So it's one way at a time and it leads to delays even for small goods vehicles and for heavy goods vehicles. It's even worse. And the nearest detour is an 18 mile detour through the already congested centre of Burton. In the constituency of my honourable friend for Burton and Uttoxeter, I will, of course, give way.
So it's one way at a time and it leads to delays even for small goods vehicles and for heavy goods vehicles. It's even worse. And the nearest detour is an 18 mile detour through the already congested centre of Burton. In the constituency of my honourable friend for Burton and Uttoxeter, I will, of course, give way.
11:04
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
Thank you, and I thank my hon. Friend for all the work that he's done, and I'm very proud to support him on this campaign, because he's right that it does affect my constituency, both businesses that have to get goods through this key arterial route and also residents too. This has cross-party support and those from the local authority too. So does he agree that this is absolutely the right thing that the structures fund should be put towards?
11:04
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
I appreciate my my honourable friend and neighbour's intervention. There it is. It is really important. It's economic, it's social, it's cultural. And actually, when you look at that detour, when I say it goes through the middle of Burton, it goes through the middle of Burton. This is not this is not. It goes very close to the to the town. It goes through the middle of one of the biggest towns in Britain's, I think, fourth biggest county.
The diversion is really significant. It's 18 miles. And it's not something that is just a bit of an inconvenience. It's really quite significant for anybody. And actually just for people trying to get around Burton, it's a huge amount more traffic just on those local roads. I will of course, give way, sir.
The diversion is really significant. It's 18 miles. And it's not something that is just a bit of an inconvenience. It's really quite significant for anybody. And actually just for people trying to get around Burton, it's a huge amount more traffic just on those local roads. I will of course, give way, sir.
11:05
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
I thank the member for giving way and also for the brilliant speech he's making about a campaign that we've been trying to run for a long time now, and I'm very grateful that we've got the opportunity for the minister to hear on the diversion point that you make. My farmers in my patch have also complained about the cost that's adding to their business, because they need to use sometimes 20l extra of red diesel. And in the cost of living crisis.
And the challenge that businesses are facing, this is not acceptable. It is also an environmental problem. So does he agree with me that it's absolutely essential that we get this bridge? Because for 20 years now we've been promised it and it's about due.
And the challenge that businesses are facing, this is not acceptable. It is also an environmental problem. So does he agree with me that it's absolutely essential that we get this bridge? Because for 20 years now we've been promised it and it's about due.
11:05
11:06
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
My hon. Friend is a real advocate for Chetwynd Bridge, as are all of the colleagues who've contributed today. This is a really important piece of infrastructure for actually a huge part of the country, and at least for constituencies and much further afield. So yeah, completely agree with my hon. Friend and neighbor, that we are all very eager to see the outcome of the structures fund . Coming back on to her point about the impact on different, different vehicles using it.
I would really like to start actually with emergency services. So ambulances are currently able to traverse the bridge. They're below the weight limit, but they do get caught up in the queues that that form because it's signalized and it's one way where it should be two lane. But actually a modern fire engine weighs upwards of 12 tonnes. Fill it full of water. It's even more. And those appliances are not allowed to face Chetwynd Bridge.
And that's an 18 mile detour to go north via Burton. Or actually, if you're going south, you have to go all the way down to Alford in my friend's constituency. And we've seen this year actually the devastating impact that wildfires can have. We had the terrible situation in Stourbridge over the summer. That same night, every single pump that Staffordshire Fire Service could could activate was out fighting wildfires in Staffordshire.
Staffordshire Fire Service dealt with well over well in excess of 1000 outdoor fires just this summer, and being able to get those pumps from where they are to where they need to be is absolutely, vitally important and that 18 miles means minute lost, minutes lost, time wasted, potentially property damage, property lost and really worryingly, lives at greater risk. And that is probably the most extreme example, that case of fire engines not being able to get around that part of England.
But actually for businesses in our region. I'll come back to the honourable member for Strangford, and its impact is daily and very serious. Litchfield has had really significant growth in the last couple of decades, because we are part of that golden triangle of freight and logistics in the Midlands. I think you're within a three hour drive of 90% of the population of the UK. Any time you're in Litchfield or up that A38 corridor in Litchfield constituency, more than 1 in 10 of the jobs depend directly on road haulage.
In Tamworth next door it's 7.3%. These are really significant numbers of jobs which rely on road haulage, being able to get things around the country quickly, and those retail and hotel sectors, which are really heavily dependent, are our largest employers. This isn't just a nice to have, it's really essential to those local economies that are the beating heart of the entire national economy. Chatwin bridge itself is just a few miles from Fradley Park, which is a really, really important logistics hub, which is spread over 173 acres.
And as a result of this partial closure, HGVs that could have used that route are having to go through the additional time and cost of their journeys. Not to mention that polluting impact, 18 miles of HGV is a lot of carbon footprint. I'm actually really pleased that the terms of the structures fund placed special emphasis on road haulage, recognising the significance of that sector and the impact on businesses at Fradley Park is is really serious and really ongoing.
It's why I do that, and I'd also like to thank the minister in his previous portfolio for his engagement about how that structures fund was was constructed, and specifically to look into whether replacements would be considered as part of that. And I think it was May when we last wrote to him about that, myself and the honourable member for Tamworth and beyond that, I've already stressed on the knock on impact on haulage, and that's felt really acutely at cut in estate, which is just up from the bridge on the Tamworth side into South Derbyshire in my hon.
Friend's constituency cutting estate hosts numerous festivals, including Bearded Theory with a capacity of 15,000 visitors, and bloodstock, the UK's largest metal metal festival with a capacity of 20,000. I'm assuming you've been at least once. And festival organisers and the estate all support the urgent replacement of this bridge, the primary access route to that estate. They've told MPs, both myself, the honourable member for South Derbyshire and Tamworth, the serious impact on the events set up of not being able to bring lorries across that bridge and having to use the detour.
They are really concerned about what a permanent closure might mean and actually, if we don't get this replacement, a permanent closure is inevitable. It's a case of when, not if.
I would really like to start actually with emergency services. So ambulances are currently able to traverse the bridge. They're below the weight limit, but they do get caught up in the queues that that form because it's signalized and it's one way where it should be two lane. But actually a modern fire engine weighs upwards of 12 tonnes. Fill it full of water. It's even more. And those appliances are not allowed to face Chetwynd Bridge.
And that's an 18 mile detour to go north via Burton. Or actually, if you're going south, you have to go all the way down to Alford in my friend's constituency. And we've seen this year actually the devastating impact that wildfires can have. We had the terrible situation in Stourbridge over the summer. That same night, every single pump that Staffordshire Fire Service could could activate was out fighting wildfires in Staffordshire.
Staffordshire Fire Service dealt with well over well in excess of 1000 outdoor fires just this summer, and being able to get those pumps from where they are to where they need to be is absolutely, vitally important and that 18 miles means minute lost, minutes lost, time wasted, potentially property damage, property lost and really worryingly, lives at greater risk. And that is probably the most extreme example, that case of fire engines not being able to get around that part of England.
But actually for businesses in our region. I'll come back to the honourable member for Strangford, and its impact is daily and very serious. Litchfield has had really significant growth in the last couple of decades, because we are part of that golden triangle of freight and logistics in the Midlands. I think you're within a three hour drive of 90% of the population of the UK. Any time you're in Litchfield or up that A38 corridor in Litchfield constituency, more than 1 in 10 of the jobs depend directly on road haulage.
In Tamworth next door it's 7.3%. These are really significant numbers of jobs which rely on road haulage, being able to get things around the country quickly, and those retail and hotel sectors, which are really heavily dependent, are our largest employers. This isn't just a nice to have, it's really essential to those local economies that are the beating heart of the entire national economy. Chatwin bridge itself is just a few miles from Fradley Park, which is a really, really important logistics hub, which is spread over 173 acres.
And as a result of this partial closure, HGVs that could have used that route are having to go through the additional time and cost of their journeys. Not to mention that polluting impact, 18 miles of HGV is a lot of carbon footprint. I'm actually really pleased that the terms of the structures fund placed special emphasis on road haulage, recognising the significance of that sector and the impact on businesses at Fradley Park is is really serious and really ongoing.
It's why I do that, and I'd also like to thank the minister in his previous portfolio for his engagement about how that structures fund was was constructed, and specifically to look into whether replacements would be considered as part of that. And I think it was May when we last wrote to him about that, myself and the honourable member for Tamworth and beyond that, I've already stressed on the knock on impact on haulage, and that's felt really acutely at cut in estate, which is just up from the bridge on the Tamworth side into South Derbyshire in my hon.
Friend's constituency cutting estate hosts numerous festivals, including Bearded Theory with a capacity of 15,000 visitors, and bloodstock, the UK's largest metal metal festival with a capacity of 20,000. I'm assuming you've been at least once. And festival organisers and the estate all support the urgent replacement of this bridge, the primary access route to that estate. They've told MPs, both myself, the honourable member for South Derbyshire and Tamworth, the serious impact on the events set up of not being able to bring lorries across that bridge and having to use the detour.
They are really concerned about what a permanent closure might mean and actually, if we don't get this replacement, a permanent closure is inevitable. It's a case of when, not if.
11:10
11:10
11:10
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
I thank the honourable member for his incredible leadership and work on campaigning to get this bridge sorted. Ollie Nielsen, who runs Catton Hall, I know you know, shared with me that just with three festivals that they run at that estate in the last 20 years has brought 20 million to the local economy. And that's just for three festivals. So does the honourable member agree with me that this isn't just about emergency services, this isn't just about people having a fun time at festivals.
This is about the local economy.
This is about the local economy.
11:11
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
I 100% couldn't couldn't agree more. My honourable friend. You know, the government really wants to talk about growth in every postcode. Well here's some growth for our postcode. Like being able to lift these restrictions will make it easier for people to move around our parts of Staffordshire and Derbyshire. And that will directly impact on the ability of businesses to be able to invest in, invest internally and to be able to grow and to continue to drive our local economies.
It is really important. And just before I come to my conclusion, because I've got a couple of minutes, I would like to just place on record my thanks to the honourable members for South Derbyshire and Uttoxeter and Tamworth for all the work that we've done on this and they've supported because this isn't just one constituency, it's at least four and it goes much further afield, into Staffordshire and into Derbyshire and also Leicester. I will, of course, give way again, Sarah.
It is really important. And just before I come to my conclusion, because I've got a couple of minutes, I would like to just place on record my thanks to the honourable members for South Derbyshire and Uttoxeter and Tamworth for all the work that we've done on this and they've supported because this isn't just one constituency, it's at least four and it goes much further afield, into Staffordshire and into Derbyshire and also Leicester. I will, of course, give way again, Sarah.
11:11
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
I thank the member for indulging me one more time. I know time is short. I think the point that you make that this really is absolutely essential to our constituencies and all of those here, and that actually we we cannot have a closure of this bridge. That is not an option. We have already tried the £14 million to fix it. It didn't work. It is a heritage bridge. We need a new bridge, and we must have support from the minister to make sure that this is going to help all of our constituents going forward.
Thank you. Does he agree?
Thank you. Does he agree?
11:12
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
I 100% agree. My, my my honourable friend, it is it is really essential. This this bridge is a big piece of infrastructure. Now, I understand that the minister will not be able to give me a yes or no from the despatch box today. I am aware of how this works, but my honourable friends and I are really eager to hear about more. A timeline for the progress of the Structures Fund and the bridge scheme is effectively shovel ready.
Staffordshire County Council are prepared to commit to up to £6 million, which is over £6 million, to the project. They're asking for just over 40 from the Structures Fund to be able to support that, but they are absolutely saying that they want this bridge open in 2029. This is a shovel ready project that can be really driven really quickly, and I think the ability of being able to use that structures fund to invest into communities like ours is a really great opportunity for the government to be able to show growth in every postcode, that politics can work, that big government can work for people, and we can get this investment into the place where it needs to go.
And so I'd be really eager if the minister can set out a timeline for the structures fund here, and whether he or the relevant minister will be able to meet with me and my friends to discuss that timeline further. Thank you very much.
Staffordshire County Council are prepared to commit to up to £6 million, which is over £6 million, to the project. They're asking for just over 40 from the Structures Fund to be able to support that, but they are absolutely saying that they want this bridge open in 2029. This is a shovel ready project that can be really driven really quickly, and I think the ability of being able to use that structures fund to invest into communities like ours is a really great opportunity for the government to be able to show growth in every postcode, that politics can work, that big government can work for people, and we can get this investment into the place where it needs to go.
And so I'd be really eager if the minister can set out a timeline for the structures fund here, and whether he or the relevant minister will be able to meet with me and my friends to discuss that timeline further. Thank you very much.
11:13
11:13
Speaker 15
-
Speaker 15
very much and always a pleasure to see you in the chair. Mr. McVey. I commend my hon. Friend's commitment to seeing this crucial bridge in his constituency replaced. The government is committed to improving the condition of local roads, and I recognise that restrictions and closures are sometimes unavoidable for safety reasons, but the costs of these are considerable diversions. Cost businesses money, take up drivers time and can increase congestion on other roads.
And I recognise what my friend said regarding emergency services. I want to ensure that all highway authorities have what they need to manage their their assets as effectively and efficiently as possible to avoid these very impacts. We are therefore supporting highway authorities with record investment of £7.3 billion for local highways maintenance over the next four years. This clearly demonstrates our commitment to tackle the poor state of our local roads that have resulted from historic underinvestment.
We are also ensuring that every single pound of our record investment goes further. The long term certainty of our four year settlement allows authorities to plan ahead and shift from reactive fixes to proactive preventative maintenance. This reduces unplanned disruptions and means funding can be spent more efficiently. Now, alongside our record uplift in highways maintenance, the government has launched the Structures Fund to much of the country's vital transport infrastructure has been allowed to deteriorate, creating risks for communities, businesses and the wider economy.
Across the country. Around 3000 bridges are currently unable to carry the heaviest vehicles, restricting freight and agricultural traffic. The government believes that repairing or replacing these assets is essential if our transport network is to remain safe, reliable and resilient for the future. The Structures Fund will provide capital funding for repair or replacement of major local highway structures that local highways cannot afford to restore from their own budgets. Eligible assets include bridges, flyovers and retaining walls.
Now, the government wants these investments not only to repair ageing infrastructure, but also to ensure structures are fit for modern transport demands and more resilient to extreme weather events as climate risks increase, strengthening critical assets now will help future avoid future disruption and long term costs. Local highway authorities have until the 3rd of August to put structures forward for investment, and we expect to announce funding awards in the autumn. I was pleased that Staffordshire County Council put forward for the fund, and so effectively conveyed the strength of local support for their plans to replace this structure, Mr.
McVeigh. It is a testament to the country's excellence in engineering that a pre 1830s cast iron bridge still forms part of our road network. I recognise the challenges that modern traffic poses to old assets such as this, and I appreciate the stewardship of Staffordshire County Council that they have demonstrated over the last few years with their management of this asset, as well as the crossing's importance to local communities, businesses and key stakeholders such as the National Memorial Arboretum.
I recognise that traffic management and compliance challenges posed by the current 7.5 tonne weight and 2.3m width restrictions, but road users will no doubt appreciate that it does remain open to some traffic. I want to commend again my hon. Friend's commitment to seeing this crucial bridge in his constituency replaced. He remarked earlier on that Chetwynd Bridge isn't famous. Well, trust me, it feels famous to me. After endless campaigning, it definitely feels famous to me and his constituents.
My hon. Friend's constituents should be in no doubt just how hard my hon. Friend fights for his community, though he didn't invite me miss McVeigh to bloodstock, I'd be delighted to accompany you. Look, I recognise that the current restrictions are causing his constituents disruption. I will update them, of course, as soon as possible. When we announce the successful structures. Fund schemes? Thank you.
And I recognise what my friend said regarding emergency services. I want to ensure that all highway authorities have what they need to manage their their assets as effectively and efficiently as possible to avoid these very impacts. We are therefore supporting highway authorities with record investment of £7.3 billion for local highways maintenance over the next four years. This clearly demonstrates our commitment to tackle the poor state of our local roads that have resulted from historic underinvestment.
We are also ensuring that every single pound of our record investment goes further. The long term certainty of our four year settlement allows authorities to plan ahead and shift from reactive fixes to proactive preventative maintenance. This reduces unplanned disruptions and means funding can be spent more efficiently. Now, alongside our record uplift in highways maintenance, the government has launched the Structures Fund to much of the country's vital transport infrastructure has been allowed to deteriorate, creating risks for communities, businesses and the wider economy.
Across the country. Around 3000 bridges are currently unable to carry the heaviest vehicles, restricting freight and agricultural traffic. The government believes that repairing or replacing these assets is essential if our transport network is to remain safe, reliable and resilient for the future. The Structures Fund will provide capital funding for repair or replacement of major local highway structures that local highways cannot afford to restore from their own budgets. Eligible assets include bridges, flyovers and retaining walls.
Now, the government wants these investments not only to repair ageing infrastructure, but also to ensure structures are fit for modern transport demands and more resilient to extreme weather events as climate risks increase, strengthening critical assets now will help future avoid future disruption and long term costs. Local highway authorities have until the 3rd of August to put structures forward for investment, and we expect to announce funding awards in the autumn. I was pleased that Staffordshire County Council put forward for the fund, and so effectively conveyed the strength of local support for their plans to replace this structure, Mr.
McVeigh. It is a testament to the country's excellence in engineering that a pre 1830s cast iron bridge still forms part of our road network. I recognise the challenges that modern traffic poses to old assets such as this, and I appreciate the stewardship of Staffordshire County Council that they have demonstrated over the last few years with their management of this asset, as well as the crossing's importance to local communities, businesses and key stakeholders such as the National Memorial Arboretum.
I recognise that traffic management and compliance challenges posed by the current 7.5 tonne weight and 2.3m width restrictions, but road users will no doubt appreciate that it does remain open to some traffic. I want to commend again my hon. Friend's commitment to seeing this crucial bridge in his constituency replaced. He remarked earlier on that Chetwynd Bridge isn't famous. Well, trust me, it feels famous to me. After endless campaigning, it definitely feels famous to me and his constituents.
My hon. Friend's constituents should be in no doubt just how hard my hon. Friend fights for his community, though he didn't invite me miss McVeigh to bloodstock, I'd be delighted to accompany you. Look, I recognise that the current restrictions are causing his constituents disruption. I will update them, of course, as soon as possible. When we announce the successful structures. Fund schemes? Thank you.
11:17
14:30
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Government oversight of underperforming NHS trusts. Now, I should start by saying that I am the MP for Chelmsford, which is an Essex based constituency, and my local trust is called the Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust. It decided a few years ago to kind of have three hospitals all under the same trust. My local hospital is called Broomfield Hospital. It is not actually in my constituency. It is in the neighbouring constituency constituency of north west Essex.
But for all intents and purposes, my hospital because it's the main hospital that serves my constituents and it fills up my inbox every single day with tales of woe, both from patients and from staff. Now, back in, I should say as well that there are other members around the room, and I thank them very much for coming along today, who I know are also part of the same the same trust. But there will be other honourable members from across the House who are served by other NHS trusts and will be probably experiencing very similar unfortunate things.
And I look forward to hearing the stories from them, because this is a really important getting NHS trusts that perform properly and serve their patients and look after their staff well is incredibly important. It underpins everything that we do in society, looking after the most vulnerable, and we aren't getting it right at the moment. And I'm afraid to say I don't feel that the government is getting it right. And that's what I'm here to to talk about today.
I should say that the Mid and South Essex Trust, it was recognised as somebody said to me earlier, not too far away from me here today. They said to me, oh, I think I'm in the worst trust in the country. And I said, I'll go round for round with you on that one, and I'll give you some details about why I believe that later on. But it was announced back in March, the mid and South Essex was going to be placed into an intensive recovery programme that was announced, I think, on late in March by the then Health Secretary.
And, and, and we waited to find out what the details of that was going to be. Now, the reason for that is that over several years, mid and South Essex has been massively underperforming. There have been huge issues. And I don't exaggerate when I say that it fills up my inbox every single day. We're talking about long waits, we're talking about delays to treatment, we're talking about difficulty accessing care, but we're also talking about when they do access that care.
Patients are not getting the the service that they need. They're not getting the outcomes, most importantly, that they that they need and deserve. I'd like to pay very early on tribute to the staff who work at at Broomfield Hospital and across the South Essex Trust, indeed across all of trusts across the country. They are working in very difficult circumstances quite a lot of the time in using infrastructure that isn't fit for purpose, that hasn't been invested in over properly over many years and they are doing their very, very best.
But unfortunately they are not getting the support that they need. I have met with staff and patients and the Mid and South Essex Foundation Trust leadership many, many times over a sustained period of time, and I know honourable members around this room from across the House have done the same thing as well. I do believe it is, unfortunately, one of the worst trusts in the country on both patient and staff measures. We pushed for change. We pushed for changes locally, but national support is needed.
Now, let me talk about some of the range of issues that have been raised with me now. I've walked around Broomfield Hospital, both with the senior leadership team and with some of the, shall we say, less senior leadership at the hospital. And I don't think it should be possible, actually, for me to be able to walk around a hospital and point out things that are so obviously wrong. And yet I could there were lights outside theatres that hadn't been working, I was told, for ten years.
Now, these are things that should be relatively easy to fix. But when patients have to write to me and tell me about mould that is growing on the walls and on the windows of a children's ward, something is going seriously, seriously wrong. When an 80 year old gentleman told me not a long time ago, but two weekends ago, he told my staff that he had been queuing out the door at the emergency department on a Saturday for an hour, and he's in his 80s, and nobody even bothered to offer him a seat to sit down on.
Something is going drastically wrong when we have lost sight of the importance of just common decency, of human compassion, looking after patients, and when consultants retire, waiting lists are being disbanded. They're not being replaced. They're just being disbanded. People are writing to me about those sorts of things all the time. And patients have very little way of of raising the concerns that they have. They can go to pals, but unfortunately, the delays in getting responses back from pals are enormous and MPs don't.
Well, we can raise it with the trust leadership and we can go through pals as well. And we still don't get the responses that we need. There seems to be a lack of communication between leadership and staff and. And there seems to we seem to have lost sight a little bit of what's important and things that just make sense to keep on doing. Now, I had a there was a round table for the Mid and South Essex Trust.
The leadership there and and Essex MPs who were in that trust or just earlier on this week. And while not all Essex MPs could come along and I know many of them sent their staffers, I was certainly there and we talked about heat. We talked about this very long, hot summer that we've had recently, and we talked about how that had had an impact on the running of the hospital. And one of the things the the chief executive told me in that meeting was that it meant that some of the theatres had had to be closed because there was too much humidity in the air, and they said, so the theatres had to be closed.
Obviously that has a knock on effect to patient waiting lists and patient outcomes as well, and patient experience as well, I would say increases the waiting list and etcetera. They said that they had been gifted some air conditioning units by, I won't mention the name of the company, but a very generous national company who'd gifted some air conditioning units. That sounds great, doesn't it? But they can't plug enough of them in because the electrical because the electrical circuits won't cope with it.
So we have an infrastructure and this is actually a fairly new build hospital. It's a kind of combination of PFI and some older buildings. But this is a fairly new hospital. And yet we can't plug in enough air conditioning units to keep our theatres open to keep. I was told, by the way, that humidity isn't reduced by air conditioning units. I'm not too sure about that. I'm sure there are other ways of reducing humidity. But anyway, so I said, okay, well, you know, it was a really hot summer.
And with El Nino happening next year, we are expecting possibly to see another hot summer next year, possibly even hotter. And what contingency plans are being developed to make sure that we can deal with it, because we know that this is just going to keep on happening. Long, hot summers. Can I make this one final point? And I'll absolutely give way, because I want to tell you what the chief executive's response was to my question about whether they were developing contingency plans for next summer.
And he said, no, we're not. I just I, I, my mind is blown by that answer that it was actually said out loud. It is obvious. And I want to say this as gently and and as courteously as possible. I think it is obvious that this is a trust that is massively struggling. And it is not just the the staff working day to day. It is obviously the leadership. This is actually a new leadership team there.
They obviously have lost sight of the importance of focusing on some things, and I will give way to the honourable gentleman. Thank you
But for all intents and purposes, my hospital because it's the main hospital that serves my constituents and it fills up my inbox every single day with tales of woe, both from patients and from staff. Now, back in, I should say as well that there are other members around the room, and I thank them very much for coming along today, who I know are also part of the same the same trust. But there will be other honourable members from across the House who are served by other NHS trusts and will be probably experiencing very similar unfortunate things.
And I look forward to hearing the stories from them, because this is a really important getting NHS trusts that perform properly and serve their patients and look after their staff well is incredibly important. It underpins everything that we do in society, looking after the most vulnerable, and we aren't getting it right at the moment. And I'm afraid to say I don't feel that the government is getting it right. And that's what I'm here to to talk about today.
I should say that the Mid and South Essex Trust, it was recognised as somebody said to me earlier, not too far away from me here today. They said to me, oh, I think I'm in the worst trust in the country. And I said, I'll go round for round with you on that one, and I'll give you some details about why I believe that later on. But it was announced back in March, the mid and South Essex was going to be placed into an intensive recovery programme that was announced, I think, on late in March by the then Health Secretary.
And, and, and we waited to find out what the details of that was going to be. Now, the reason for that is that over several years, mid and South Essex has been massively underperforming. There have been huge issues. And I don't exaggerate when I say that it fills up my inbox every single day. We're talking about long waits, we're talking about delays to treatment, we're talking about difficulty accessing care, but we're also talking about when they do access that care.
Patients are not getting the the service that they need. They're not getting the outcomes, most importantly, that they that they need and deserve. I'd like to pay very early on tribute to the staff who work at at Broomfield Hospital and across the South Essex Trust, indeed across all of trusts across the country. They are working in very difficult circumstances quite a lot of the time in using infrastructure that isn't fit for purpose, that hasn't been invested in over properly over many years and they are doing their very, very best.
But unfortunately they are not getting the support that they need. I have met with staff and patients and the Mid and South Essex Foundation Trust leadership many, many times over a sustained period of time, and I know honourable members around this room from across the House have done the same thing as well. I do believe it is, unfortunately, one of the worst trusts in the country on both patient and staff measures. We pushed for change. We pushed for changes locally, but national support is needed.
Now, let me talk about some of the range of issues that have been raised with me now. I've walked around Broomfield Hospital, both with the senior leadership team and with some of the, shall we say, less senior leadership at the hospital. And I don't think it should be possible, actually, for me to be able to walk around a hospital and point out things that are so obviously wrong. And yet I could there were lights outside theatres that hadn't been working, I was told, for ten years.
Now, these are things that should be relatively easy to fix. But when patients have to write to me and tell me about mould that is growing on the walls and on the windows of a children's ward, something is going seriously, seriously wrong. When an 80 year old gentleman told me not a long time ago, but two weekends ago, he told my staff that he had been queuing out the door at the emergency department on a Saturday for an hour, and he's in his 80s, and nobody even bothered to offer him a seat to sit down on.
Something is going drastically wrong when we have lost sight of the importance of just common decency, of human compassion, looking after patients, and when consultants retire, waiting lists are being disbanded. They're not being replaced. They're just being disbanded. People are writing to me about those sorts of things all the time. And patients have very little way of of raising the concerns that they have. They can go to pals, but unfortunately, the delays in getting responses back from pals are enormous and MPs don't.
Well, we can raise it with the trust leadership and we can go through pals as well. And we still don't get the responses that we need. There seems to be a lack of communication between leadership and staff and. And there seems to we seem to have lost sight a little bit of what's important and things that just make sense to keep on doing. Now, I had a there was a round table for the Mid and South Essex Trust.
The leadership there and and Essex MPs who were in that trust or just earlier on this week. And while not all Essex MPs could come along and I know many of them sent their staffers, I was certainly there and we talked about heat. We talked about this very long, hot summer that we've had recently, and we talked about how that had had an impact on the running of the hospital. And one of the things the the chief executive told me in that meeting was that it meant that some of the theatres had had to be closed because there was too much humidity in the air, and they said, so the theatres had to be closed.
Obviously that has a knock on effect to patient waiting lists and patient outcomes as well, and patient experience as well, I would say increases the waiting list and etcetera. They said that they had been gifted some air conditioning units by, I won't mention the name of the company, but a very generous national company who'd gifted some air conditioning units. That sounds great, doesn't it? But they can't plug enough of them in because the electrical because the electrical circuits won't cope with it.
So we have an infrastructure and this is actually a fairly new build hospital. It's a kind of combination of PFI and some older buildings. But this is a fairly new hospital. And yet we can't plug in enough air conditioning units to keep our theatres open to keep. I was told, by the way, that humidity isn't reduced by air conditioning units. I'm not too sure about that. I'm sure there are other ways of reducing humidity. But anyway, so I said, okay, well, you know, it was a really hot summer.
And with El Nino happening next year, we are expecting possibly to see another hot summer next year, possibly even hotter. And what contingency plans are being developed to make sure that we can deal with it, because we know that this is just going to keep on happening. Long, hot summers. Can I make this one final point? And I'll absolutely give way, because I want to tell you what the chief executive's response was to my question about whether they were developing contingency plans for next summer.
And he said, no, we're not. I just I, I, my mind is blown by that answer that it was actually said out loud. It is obvious. And I want to say this as gently and and as courteously as possible. I think it is obvious that this is a trust that is massively struggling. And it is not just the the staff working day to day. It is obviously the leadership. This is actually a new leadership team there.
They obviously have lost sight of the importance of focusing on some things, and I will give way to the honourable gentleman. Thank you
14:37
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
very much. And the honourable lady makes some important points. We share a hospital trust. Many of my constituents from Basildon and Billericay go to her hospital in Broomfield. Some of them will go down to Basildon in my hon. Friend's constituency and also down into Southend as well in neighbouring constituencies too. I just wanted to pick up on that point around contingency planning, because Basildon Hospital is particularly bad as part of that trust in corridor care, and it is very clear to me that that is a major issue, which is now really hammering people at home.
And I just wanted to also just make a very brief point around very brief that that that care. Mr. Stewart, thank you for your indulgence. I had a constituent who came to me who was handed a second hand book on on grievance after he had just lost his wife with notes from a previous constituent, from somebody else's constituent. And it just really struck me that whether it's corridor care or that sort of almost thoughtlessness that that is actually care is missing in part of Marie Goldman.
And I just wanted to also just make a very brief point around very brief that that that care. Mr. Stewart, thank you for your indulgence. I had a constituent who came to me who was handed a second hand book on on grievance after he had just lost his wife with notes from a previous constituent, from somebody else's constituent. And it just really struck me that whether it's corridor care or that sort of almost thoughtlessness that that is actually care is missing in part of Marie Goldman.
14:38
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Thank you. And I thank the honourable gentleman for his for his intervention, for his compassion, for his contribution. He's right to point out that we are in the same trust, and we and our constituents experience each other's local hospitals as well. I want to build on actually what he said about the experience of patients, because I think it's really important that we remember the patients in all of this, and we can talk about financial planning and, you know, keeping budgets down and sticking within the envelope of how much was said to be spending and stuff.
But at the end of the day, it's patients that are suffering. One patient wrote to me in February, just to give you an idea of how long this has been going on, but I mean, February this year, this could have been February 2nd years ago, three years ago, five years ago, they said I waited for hours for triage, and it was eight hours until I was admitted to a ward. I spent much of that time sitting on the cold floor by the open doors, or standing as there were not enough seats.
But it's not just about patients, it's also about the staff who work there. A nurse who wrote to me just last month in September 2026. I have worked at the trust since 2008, and when I first joined, I was so proud to say I worked there. The next few years this feeling remained. But for the last eight years or so, things have definitely taken a nosedive. The trust seems to run on broken promises and the goodwill of frontline staff.
I am no longer proud to say where I work. I know many staff feel the same and worry for the safety of the patients, of the staff, for the safety of the patients, the staff and the trust.
But at the end of the day, it's patients that are suffering. One patient wrote to me in February, just to give you an idea of how long this has been going on, but I mean, February this year, this could have been February 2nd years ago, three years ago, five years ago, they said I waited for hours for triage, and it was eight hours until I was admitted to a ward. I spent much of that time sitting on the cold floor by the open doors, or standing as there were not enough seats.
But it's not just about patients, it's also about the staff who work there. A nurse who wrote to me just last month in September 2026. I have worked at the trust since 2008, and when I first joined, I was so proud to say I worked there. The next few years this feeling remained. But for the last eight years or so, things have definitely taken a nosedive. The trust seems to run on broken promises and the goodwill of frontline staff.
I am no longer proud to say where I work. I know many staff feel the same and worry for the safety of the patients, of the staff, for the safety of the patients, the staff and the trust.
14:40
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Yes, I'm very grateful. The merger of Basildon, Broomfield and Southend hospitals six years ago has turned out to be an abject failure. That's not the fault of the patients. It's certainly not the fault of the very hard pressed staff. It's the fault of the management. And we've seen endless revolving door changes of management. Does the honourable lady agree with me? It is now time for Claire Panicker, the Eastern Region director of the NHS, who was the first chief executive of the trust and indeed the cheerleader for the merger to step in, intervene and finally put this problem right once and for all.
14:40
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I thank the honourable gentleman for his intervention. I think this is bigger than just one person, is what I would say. And I think this needs much more attention from government and across the board. Actually, by across the board, I don't just mean the local trust board. I mean, you know, it needs a lot of oversight and it needs a lot of intervention. And really quickly as well, we're talking about an intensive recovery programme.
It was first built by the then health secretary as being a rapid recovery programme, rapid improvement programme. I've not seen anything rapid yet. I'm afraid I'm still waiting. It was announced in March. I'm still waiting to see, you know, kind of some real outcome from it. It's supposed to deliver stuff within six months. I know they waited until the new chief exec got in place in June, so we're now a few months into it, you know, but I'm, you know, I my patients are, you know, my constituents patients are really suffering.
Look, to give an example of, you know, some stats. Oh cancer treatment cancer diagnosed or rule out within 28 days. The median average nationally is 78.6%. Mid and South Essex is 64.3%. It's 114th out of 117 trusts. Elective patients waiting under 18 weeks. This is where higher is better. The median average is 65.2%. Mid and South Essex 50.4%, 117 out of 117. And again, elective patients waiting over 52 weeks lower is better medium 1.5%.
Mid and South Essex 8.1%. Again 117th out of 117. And this is where I would rather actually not claim the prize to having one of the worst in the country. But here we are. The numbers don't lie. I will give way. Yes.
It was first built by the then health secretary as being a rapid recovery programme, rapid improvement programme. I've not seen anything rapid yet. I'm afraid I'm still waiting. It was announced in March. I'm still waiting to see, you know, kind of some real outcome from it. It's supposed to deliver stuff within six months. I know they waited until the new chief exec got in place in June, so we're now a few months into it, you know, but I'm, you know, I my patients are, you know, my constituents patients are really suffering.
Look, to give an example of, you know, some stats. Oh cancer treatment cancer diagnosed or rule out within 28 days. The median average nationally is 78.6%. Mid and South Essex is 64.3%. It's 114th out of 117 trusts. Elective patients waiting under 18 weeks. This is where higher is better. The median average is 65.2%. Mid and South Essex 50.4%, 117 out of 117. And again, elective patients waiting over 52 weeks lower is better medium 1.5%.
Mid and South Essex 8.1%. Again 117th out of 117. And this is where I would rather actually not claim the prize to having one of the worst in the country. But here we are. The numbers don't lie. I will give way. Yes.
14:42
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Thank the member for giving way. And she's making an excellent speech about the importance of of NHS trusts being able to meet their targets and provide care. My local trust, similarly, isn't in my constituency. It's the University Hospital of Derby and Burton, and they've been missing their cancer targets by. So people are waiting two months. So that's 40% of the patients, which is just not good enough. And I wondered whether or not you would agree that despite the fact there has been obviously announcements and increased funding, I think this is bearing the brunt of the cut after cut after cut that we saw under the previous government, and that it's going to take a long time to turn this around unless we have increased intervention from government.
14:43
14:43
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yes, she makes a really important point. I have no problem making cuts if they are genuine efficiencies. If we look at a system and go, do you know what? There is wastage over here so we can cut it from over here. If we're confident that things are going to continue to do well over here. But that never seems to be the case. It just seems to be a case of we just cut and how the consequences.
Now I find that really, really frustrating. And the bottom line is that patients suffer from it, and that is never good for the economy. If we want to boil it down to to money and economics and finances and stuff, that's never good for the economy. Because when people have worse outcomes, they tend to need to stay in hospital for longer, and that costs more money in the first place. So it's ridiculous. It's a crazy way of running things.
Look, there was a staff survey that happened that was done in the trust in November last year. The results speak for themselves. You can look it up. This is the money one. This is the money answer. This is the one that tells you pretty much everything you need to know. If you read nothing else and you listen to nothing else. If staff are asked if a friend or relative needed treatment, I would be happy with the standard of care provided by this organisation.
Nationally, the average is 60.83%. Mid and South Essex 38% 38%. My word, that's just over. That's nearly two thirds of staff working in the trust saying I wouldn't want my, my, my friend or my loved one to be treated there. That has got to be ringing enormous alarm bells, enormous alarm bells. If we're not throwing everything at making sure that we turn this around right here, right now, I don't know what I don't understand the point of government, I really don't.
There have been six years of intervention. I'm very conscious of time. I've taken a few interventions. So I'm just going to go on for a few more minutes. There have been six years of intervention at this trust. First, after the merger in 2020, when CQC rating required said it requires improvement. April 2024 we had a recovery support programme which was a successor to special measures and then in March of this year, as I've already said, we have the intensive recovery programme six years and two programmes with no CQC improvement.
We have had so many health inquiries in this country, so many inquiries into maternity services, into other departments across. They've all made loads and loads and loads of recommendations. I would like to ask the Minister how many of those recommendations have actually been implemented across the country, frankly. But in mid and South Essex, how are we keeping track on that? Let's not reinvent the wheel. We've had inquiries saying what's going wrong? Let's make sure that we are implementing those recommendations from from previous inquiries, I've written three times and three times.
I've had a response back from the minister. I've welcomed the announcement. I've asked questions around the detail, but I've had different details back each time. In June and July, I was told that the responsibility lies with the trust's own board, with targeted external expertise to my July. In my July letter I said, or I was, I was. So in the July response I got, I was told it was a recovery compact and a 6 to 18 month recovery period.
In the September letter I was told we would be getting enhanced support from NHS England regional and national teams. It struck me, rereading those letters just earlier on today actually, that there's very little reference in these letters to improving patient outcomes or experience. It focuses a lot, a lot on money. I think we need to get things right and then we deal with the money afterwards. I genuinely do, because sometimes you have to invest to get things to the point that they need to be, and then you step back and you and you make those savings, but you can't do it all in one go.
It won't work. I tell you right now, it just won't work. So there is too much, I think, a focus on financial performance right here, right now. Get to that later, but sort it out for patients right now who are suffering right now. The September response that I got promises, long term sustainability. I just have to point out that NHS England is reportedly set to be abolished in April 2027, which is inside the recovery window that I've been told about.
I'm. That creates a certain amount of confusion and uncertainty. Where will we be getting the consistency from this? So I hope you'll be pleased to know I'm on my last page, but I do have a list of questions for the minister and they are. So where I'd really like to know where is the external expertise coming from that's going to be helping Mid and South Essex and genuinely, I get fed up with this merry go round of chief executives moving from one failing test to another failing trust.
Why on earth do we think we're going to get a different answer, a different outcome? If they didn't fix it over here, why did we think they're going to be able to fix it over there? So where is the genuine expertise with a tried and tested track record coming from? Who chooses the experts, who reviews whether the support is working, or are they going to be marking their own homework? Who holds the trust to account? Don't just tell me the board.
Don't just tell me MP. That's not the answer. What specific support is Mid and South Essex getting? If there's no improvement within the 6 to 18 month window, who intervenes then and what are the consequences? How is this long term NHS England goes disappears in April 2027? And finally, where is the commitment to making things better for the people it really matters for? And that's the patients and the staff.
I want to conclude by paying another tribute to the staff who do amazing work in very difficult circumstances. Patients, my constituents deserve better. Thank you.
Now I find that really, really frustrating. And the bottom line is that patients suffer from it, and that is never good for the economy. If we want to boil it down to to money and economics and finances and stuff, that's never good for the economy. Because when people have worse outcomes, they tend to need to stay in hospital for longer, and that costs more money in the first place. So it's ridiculous. It's a crazy way of running things.
Look, there was a staff survey that happened that was done in the trust in November last year. The results speak for themselves. You can look it up. This is the money one. This is the money answer. This is the one that tells you pretty much everything you need to know. If you read nothing else and you listen to nothing else. If staff are asked if a friend or relative needed treatment, I would be happy with the standard of care provided by this organisation.
Nationally, the average is 60.83%. Mid and South Essex 38% 38%. My word, that's just over. That's nearly two thirds of staff working in the trust saying I wouldn't want my, my, my friend or my loved one to be treated there. That has got to be ringing enormous alarm bells, enormous alarm bells. If we're not throwing everything at making sure that we turn this around right here, right now, I don't know what I don't understand the point of government, I really don't.
There have been six years of intervention. I'm very conscious of time. I've taken a few interventions. So I'm just going to go on for a few more minutes. There have been six years of intervention at this trust. First, after the merger in 2020, when CQC rating required said it requires improvement. April 2024 we had a recovery support programme which was a successor to special measures and then in March of this year, as I've already said, we have the intensive recovery programme six years and two programmes with no CQC improvement.
We have had so many health inquiries in this country, so many inquiries into maternity services, into other departments across. They've all made loads and loads and loads of recommendations. I would like to ask the Minister how many of those recommendations have actually been implemented across the country, frankly. But in mid and South Essex, how are we keeping track on that? Let's not reinvent the wheel. We've had inquiries saying what's going wrong? Let's make sure that we are implementing those recommendations from from previous inquiries, I've written three times and three times.
I've had a response back from the minister. I've welcomed the announcement. I've asked questions around the detail, but I've had different details back each time. In June and July, I was told that the responsibility lies with the trust's own board, with targeted external expertise to my July. In my July letter I said, or I was, I was. So in the July response I got, I was told it was a recovery compact and a 6 to 18 month recovery period.
In the September letter I was told we would be getting enhanced support from NHS England regional and national teams. It struck me, rereading those letters just earlier on today actually, that there's very little reference in these letters to improving patient outcomes or experience. It focuses a lot, a lot on money. I think we need to get things right and then we deal with the money afterwards. I genuinely do, because sometimes you have to invest to get things to the point that they need to be, and then you step back and you and you make those savings, but you can't do it all in one go.
It won't work. I tell you right now, it just won't work. So there is too much, I think, a focus on financial performance right here, right now. Get to that later, but sort it out for patients right now who are suffering right now. The September response that I got promises, long term sustainability. I just have to point out that NHS England is reportedly set to be abolished in April 2027, which is inside the recovery window that I've been told about.
I'm. That creates a certain amount of confusion and uncertainty. Where will we be getting the consistency from this? So I hope you'll be pleased to know I'm on my last page, but I do have a list of questions for the minister and they are. So where I'd really like to know where is the external expertise coming from that's going to be helping Mid and South Essex and genuinely, I get fed up with this merry go round of chief executives moving from one failing test to another failing trust.
Why on earth do we think we're going to get a different answer, a different outcome? If they didn't fix it over here, why did we think they're going to be able to fix it over there? So where is the genuine expertise with a tried and tested track record coming from? Who chooses the experts, who reviews whether the support is working, or are they going to be marking their own homework? Who holds the trust to account? Don't just tell me the board.
Don't just tell me MP. That's not the answer. What specific support is Mid and South Essex getting? If there's no improvement within the 6 to 18 month window, who intervenes then and what are the consequences? How is this long term NHS England goes disappears in April 2027? And finally, where is the commitment to making things better for the people it really matters for? And that's the patients and the staff.
I want to conclude by paying another tribute to the staff who do amazing work in very difficult circumstances. Patients, my constituents deserve better. Thank you.
14:48
14:48
14:48
14:48
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Thank you, Mr. Stewart. And thank you to the honourable member for Chelmsford. The the staff at Salford Royal are absolutely amazing. I've seen their dedication. I've joined them on picket lines as they campaign to improve patient safety as much as their own workplace conditions. I've also met whistleblowers ringing the alarm on patient safety, and I've repeatedly raised both theirs and patients concerns and called for them to be listened to by trust management.
But sadly, they've been let down and now the situation is critical. The Minister may know that Salford Royal was the poster child of NHS safety. It was one, if not the best, hospital in the country and, of course, savage austerity and round after round of cuts have undoubtedly brought our NHS to the point of collapse right across the country. But the fact that an individual trusts services can fall from outstanding in 2018 to requires improvement a few years ago, few weeks ago , warrants her personal oversight and intervention.
Now, in the time I've got our very briefly canter through how matters got to this point. Obviously in 2018, the CQC rated Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust is outstanding. It was a standalone hospital trust which then merged to form a super trust across Greater Manchester called the Northern Care Alliance. Just a year after the merger, the CQC rated the newly formed trust as requires improvement a long way from Salford's previous position, and then between 23 and 24, worrying reports about patient safety started to emerge.
There have been various interventions in 2025 there was a rapid quality review process. The CQC then issued its first section 29 a warning notice in the September regarding surgical services, citing inadequate staffing arrangements and ineffective systems for identifying and managing patient safety risks. Then later, a few months later, another warning notice had to be issued in August 26th due to significant concerns about the trust's management of risk, patient safety complaints, freedom to speak up and workforce wellbeing and inclusion.
Which brings us to the latest CQC report. A couple of weeks ago, which rated the hospital as requires improvement and identified 12 regulatory breaches relating to safe care and treatment, governance and staffing. Now all of these are very worrying, but one staff member recently said to me it's really getting worse, especially in theatres, and they'll try to blame the current industrial action. But it's not those days, it's normal days. They're just horrendous. Staff crying, staff exhausted, increasing sickness rates.
It's clear there's a crisis unfolding, staff are exhausted, and I'd urge the minister now to meet with me to discuss what actions she can take going forward to get this trust back on the steady and safe footing that its staff and patients deserve.
But sadly, they've been let down and now the situation is critical. The Minister may know that Salford Royal was the poster child of NHS safety. It was one, if not the best, hospital in the country and, of course, savage austerity and round after round of cuts have undoubtedly brought our NHS to the point of collapse right across the country. But the fact that an individual trusts services can fall from outstanding in 2018 to requires improvement a few years ago, few weeks ago , warrants her personal oversight and intervention.
Now, in the time I've got our very briefly canter through how matters got to this point. Obviously in 2018, the CQC rated Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust is outstanding. It was a standalone hospital trust which then merged to form a super trust across Greater Manchester called the Northern Care Alliance. Just a year after the merger, the CQC rated the newly formed trust as requires improvement a long way from Salford's previous position, and then between 23 and 24, worrying reports about patient safety started to emerge.
There have been various interventions in 2025 there was a rapid quality review process. The CQC then issued its first section 29 a warning notice in the September regarding surgical services, citing inadequate staffing arrangements and ineffective systems for identifying and managing patient safety risks. Then later, a few months later, another warning notice had to be issued in August 26th due to significant concerns about the trust's management of risk, patient safety complaints, freedom to speak up and workforce wellbeing and inclusion.
Which brings us to the latest CQC report. A couple of weeks ago, which rated the hospital as requires improvement and identified 12 regulatory breaches relating to safe care and treatment, governance and staffing. Now all of these are very worrying, but one staff member recently said to me it's really getting worse, especially in theatres, and they'll try to blame the current industrial action. But it's not those days, it's normal days. They're just horrendous. Staff crying, staff exhausted, increasing sickness rates.
It's clear there's a crisis unfolding, staff are exhausted, and I'd urge the minister now to meet with me to discuss what actions she can take going forward to get this trust back on the steady and safe footing that its staff and patients deserve.
14:52
14:52
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
This afternoon, and indeed, to follow the previous speaker and my hon. Friend the member for Chelmsford. I've got four NHS trusts serving my enormous constituency, which is the second biggest in in England, the North Cumbria Hospital Trust, which is ranked 117th out of 134, the Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear Foundation Mental Health Trust, ranking 39th out of 58. The University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay trust ranking 97th out of 134, and the Lancashire and South Cumbria Care Mental Health Trust, ranking 54th out of 58.
What those for trusts have got in common is they are run and staffed by outstanding people. Wonderful, compassionate, committed, capable people. And the other thing they have in common is they struggle with an underlying common challenge. And that is rurality that this government and its conservative predecessor failed to understand or indeed to tackle. Let me just start with the Morecambe Bay Hospital Trust. Mr. Stuart, a trust which has three hospitals which is funded as if it had just the one this year, the National Health NHS England and the Department of Health are therefore forcing £32.5 million worth of cost savings on the Morecambe Bay trust.
And that means that that trust is having to close 42 beds, despite the fact that over the last 12 months they have been in Opal for the highest level of alert and extreme pressure upon their services a total of 14 times, including three times during July and August. Moving on, we have the worst cancer waiting times, some of them in the country, and there'll be no surprise that that's because in South Cumbria we have no direct or close access to radiotherapy treatment.
The OECD average for people with cancer having radiotherapy is 53%. That's the target in the UK, it's a mere 36% in Lancashire and South Cumbria, with a worst in the country. In the worst country in the OECD, only 29%. In north Cumbria, we have people who use Penrith Urgent treatment Centre, which is brilliant, but it's so, so often under enormous pressure because the nearby Keswick Urgent Treatment Centre, my honourable friend constituency, is so often closed because of understaffing, mental health provision, the two mental health trusts under enormous pressure.
When you think that Cumbria has a suicide rate twice the national average, this is unacceptable. We think about the local council proposing to close Applethwaite Green care home in Windermere because of a 31% cut the council. The government has given the council's funding this year. Why? Because the government doesn't get rurality and doesn't fund services in rural communities. I want to finish by just quoting a report from Policy Exchange, which was at a forward written by my hon.
Friend the member for Oxford West and Abingdon, which read that the rural penalty is of how NHS funding formulas are disadvantaging rural and coastal areas and putting health devolution at risk. I would add it's not just putting health devolution at risk, Mr. Stuart, it's putting the health and the lives of my constituents at risk, and I hope the minister will put this right here.
What those for trusts have got in common is they are run and staffed by outstanding people. Wonderful, compassionate, committed, capable people. And the other thing they have in common is they struggle with an underlying common challenge. And that is rurality that this government and its conservative predecessor failed to understand or indeed to tackle. Let me just start with the Morecambe Bay Hospital Trust. Mr. Stuart, a trust which has three hospitals which is funded as if it had just the one this year, the National Health NHS England and the Department of Health are therefore forcing £32.5 million worth of cost savings on the Morecambe Bay trust.
And that means that that trust is having to close 42 beds, despite the fact that over the last 12 months they have been in Opal for the highest level of alert and extreme pressure upon their services a total of 14 times, including three times during July and August. Moving on, we have the worst cancer waiting times, some of them in the country, and there'll be no surprise that that's because in South Cumbria we have no direct or close access to radiotherapy treatment.
The OECD average for people with cancer having radiotherapy is 53%. That's the target in the UK, it's a mere 36% in Lancashire and South Cumbria, with a worst in the country. In the worst country in the OECD, only 29%. In north Cumbria, we have people who use Penrith Urgent treatment Centre, which is brilliant, but it's so, so often under enormous pressure because the nearby Keswick Urgent Treatment Centre, my honourable friend constituency, is so often closed because of understaffing, mental health provision, the two mental health trusts under enormous pressure.
When you think that Cumbria has a suicide rate twice the national average, this is unacceptable. We think about the local council proposing to close Applethwaite Green care home in Windermere because of a 31% cut the council. The government has given the council's funding this year. Why? Because the government doesn't get rurality and doesn't fund services in rural communities. I want to finish by just quoting a report from Policy Exchange, which was at a forward written by my hon.
Friend the member for Oxford West and Abingdon, which read that the rural penalty is of how NHS funding formulas are disadvantaging rural and coastal areas and putting health devolution at risk. I would add it's not just putting health devolution at risk, Mr. Stuart, it's putting the health and the lives of my constituents at risk, and I hope the minister will put this right here.
14:55
14:55
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Thank you very much, Mr. Serve. And to you this afternoon, and thank you to the honourable member for Chelmsford as well, for bringing this important debate to. Many communities have paid a price when NHS trusts fell, and in my own constituency of Ipswich, we know that reality all too well. There are two trusts that serve my community in terms of East Suffolk and North Essex Foundation Trust, which provides our acute hospital services and of course, Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation trusts are responsible for our mental health service.
Both, unfortunately, particularly the latter, have had a history of patients enduring long waits, inconsistent standards of care and services that fall well short of what they have every right to expect. And families were sidelined and concerns went unanswered. And I wish to begin with Nsft. And for many, many years, Nsft has been synonymous with failure. It was the first mental health trust in the country to enter special measures in 2015, and was later put into an NHS recovery support programme.
Two years ago I stood in this very room and described Nsft as arguably the worst performing mental health trust in the country, and that judgment was reflected from a litany of failings stretching back many, many years. But it's also important to acknowledge that genuine progress has been made. The picture today is markedly different from the one we saw even just a few years ago, and the number of patients waiting more than 18 weeks has fallen by over 80%.
So crisis services have improved and more than 95% of patients experiencing a first episode of psychosis now begin treatment within two weeks, referral now outperforming the national standard. And so while the trust is still rated as requiring improvement overall, several services are now rated as good. And that is in part a testament to the leadership of city who brought stability to the trust after years of disruption. And I'm grateful to be hosting a quarterly meeting between Nsft and MPs in the region to ensure progress is being made.
And so what we can learn from this is that improvement is possible even in the organisations with the most difficult legacies. But we must not confuse progress with success. This is a first step and the beginning of a recovery that has a way to go as well. I would also just finish on saying that the reforms the government are making are finally starting to turn the page of years of failure, and we have invested record breaking amounts into our health service, reducing waiting lists and cutting ambulance response times in my area and expanding our workforce.
But we should be tentative, but indeed hopeful as well. Nsft. And indeed, if I had more time to talk about today, neither yet are where patients deserve and need them to be. But there are reasons to be optimistic, and I would make just a plea to the Health Minister. With us today is to ensure that we are fully funding mental health in the way that it desperately needs to.
Our trust never recovered from brutal cuts in 2014 and massive redesigns. We are on the path to recovery. We now do have stability, but while recognising the progress so far, we must build upon it, maintain a relentless focus on delivering the improvements that all of our local patients deserve.
Both, unfortunately, particularly the latter, have had a history of patients enduring long waits, inconsistent standards of care and services that fall well short of what they have every right to expect. And families were sidelined and concerns went unanswered. And I wish to begin with Nsft. And for many, many years, Nsft has been synonymous with failure. It was the first mental health trust in the country to enter special measures in 2015, and was later put into an NHS recovery support programme.
Two years ago I stood in this very room and described Nsft as arguably the worst performing mental health trust in the country, and that judgment was reflected from a litany of failings stretching back many, many years. But it's also important to acknowledge that genuine progress has been made. The picture today is markedly different from the one we saw even just a few years ago, and the number of patients waiting more than 18 weeks has fallen by over 80%.
So crisis services have improved and more than 95% of patients experiencing a first episode of psychosis now begin treatment within two weeks, referral now outperforming the national standard. And so while the trust is still rated as requiring improvement overall, several services are now rated as good. And that is in part a testament to the leadership of city who brought stability to the trust after years of disruption. And I'm grateful to be hosting a quarterly meeting between Nsft and MPs in the region to ensure progress is being made.
And so what we can learn from this is that improvement is possible even in the organisations with the most difficult legacies. But we must not confuse progress with success. This is a first step and the beginning of a recovery that has a way to go as well. I would also just finish on saying that the reforms the government are making are finally starting to turn the page of years of failure, and we have invested record breaking amounts into our health service, reducing waiting lists and cutting ambulance response times in my area and expanding our workforce.
But we should be tentative, but indeed hopeful as well. Nsft. And indeed, if I had more time to talk about today, neither yet are where patients deserve and need them to be. But there are reasons to be optimistic, and I would make just a plea to the Health Minister. With us today is to ensure that we are fully funding mental health in the way that it desperately needs to.
Our trust never recovered from brutal cuts in 2014 and massive redesigns. We are on the path to recovery. We now do have stability, but while recognising the progress so far, we must build upon it, maintain a relentless focus on delivering the improvements that all of our local patients deserve.
14:58
14:58
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
Thank you, Mr. Stewart. I congratulate the honourable member for securing this important debate. I represent the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Trust, King's Lynn, which serves 300,000 people across Norfolk, North Cambridgeshire and South Lincolnshire, which was ranked 134 out of 134 trusts in the league table released in September last year. And that very disappointing result was uncomfortable for trust and staff. But transparency can be used to galvanise action and performance is simply not good enough.
At the moment, only 65% of cancer patients were treated within the 62 day time frame, against the standard of 85%, and only 64% of patients at A&E are seen within four hours. The trust has also had worrying reports from the Royal College of Surgeons about culture and management weaknesses, and in August, the CQC rated emergency care as requiring improvement. And when that league table was published, I was told by health ministers that intensive help would be made available to deliver better care, but it's not clear what extra support has actually been provided.
Cancer and elective waiting times have improved slightly. A9 diagnostics have not. There's certainly been more reporting requirements, but that will not drive improved performance and productivity, nor will requiring a 10% budget saving, nor will management instability. We've had a temporary chief executive, then a supposedly permanent appointment. We currently have no recruitment for a managing director. The post is being covered by the Norfolk and Waveney Hospitals Group deputy chief executive.
You need to have visible active leadership full time on site to deliver better care. So what support is the National Performance Framework actually providing a year on from that league table, how our ministers holding the trust to account and delivering dedicated staff and work in the hospital that isn't fit for purpose, which is why we secured a commitment honoured by this government as well to a new shape. But new facilities and improvements go hand in hand.
But that should be about improving services, not removing them. That's why I'm extremely concerned at leaked proposals from the Norfolk and Waveney University Hospitals Group that it's considering downgrading A&E, maternity and ICU services. These plans have been drawn up behind closed doors, with no transparency made by organisations that seemingly are unaccountable, that fail to recognise the needs of my constituents and those across the area. Clinicians have warned of the impact on patient safety and these proposals are completely unacceptable and should be ruled out now.
Indeed, the group leadership has repeatedly said publicly it wants to have more services closer to home. If that's the case, it must include a proper 24 over seven tier one A&E, maternity services and ICU in King's Lynn. She is at the heart of my community. We all want to see sustained improvements, and I urge the minister to give my constituents and the staff at the hospital the reassurance they want and rule out any notion of downgrading the services at CHH on this government's watch.
At the moment, only 65% of cancer patients were treated within the 62 day time frame, against the standard of 85%, and only 64% of patients at A&E are seen within four hours. The trust has also had worrying reports from the Royal College of Surgeons about culture and management weaknesses, and in August, the CQC rated emergency care as requiring improvement. And when that league table was published, I was told by health ministers that intensive help would be made available to deliver better care, but it's not clear what extra support has actually been provided.
Cancer and elective waiting times have improved slightly. A9 diagnostics have not. There's certainly been more reporting requirements, but that will not drive improved performance and productivity, nor will requiring a 10% budget saving, nor will management instability. We've had a temporary chief executive, then a supposedly permanent appointment. We currently have no recruitment for a managing director. The post is being covered by the Norfolk and Waveney Hospitals Group deputy chief executive.
You need to have visible active leadership full time on site to deliver better care. So what support is the National Performance Framework actually providing a year on from that league table, how our ministers holding the trust to account and delivering dedicated staff and work in the hospital that isn't fit for purpose, which is why we secured a commitment honoured by this government as well to a new shape. But new facilities and improvements go hand in hand.
But that should be about improving services, not removing them. That's why I'm extremely concerned at leaked proposals from the Norfolk and Waveney University Hospitals Group that it's considering downgrading A&E, maternity and ICU services. These plans have been drawn up behind closed doors, with no transparency made by organisations that seemingly are unaccountable, that fail to recognise the needs of my constituents and those across the area. Clinicians have warned of the impact on patient safety and these proposals are completely unacceptable and should be ruled out now.
Indeed, the group leadership has repeatedly said publicly it wants to have more services closer to home. If that's the case, it must include a proper 24 over seven tier one A&E, maternity services and ICU in King's Lynn. She is at the heart of my community. We all want to see sustained improvements, and I urge the minister to give my constituents and the staff at the hospital the reassurance they want and rule out any notion of downgrading the services at CHH on this government's watch.
15:01
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
Thank you, Mr. Stewart, and I thank the member for securing this debate. I wish to raise a serious and long standing problem of ambulance delays at the Royal Stoke University Hospital, run by the trust and situated in the neighbouring constituency of Stoke on Trent Central. Many of my constituents in Stoke on Trent South, local campaigners such as Ian Syme and West Midlands Ambulance Service have repeatedly raised concerns to me regarding this crisis, and ambulance handover is the point at which responsibility for a patient transfers from the ambulance crew to the hospital team.
Guidance set by NHS England specifies that this should take place within 15 minutes of an ambulance arriving at a hospital between April and September this year. The average wait at the Royal Stoke was one hour and 33 minutes, and the longest was 17 hours and 41 minutes. Only 16% of handovers met the 15 minute standard, making Royal Stoke the worst performing hospital in the West Midlands. On that measure and House of Commons research indicates it's the third worst in the country.
We know that such handover delays cause harm and increase the number of avoidable deaths. This is not a recent problem. The trust's handover times have been some of the longest in the country, most months since 2023, and I want to be clear that this is not an attack on frontline NHS staff. Our paramedics, ambulance crews and emergency department staff are working under immense, immense pressure, often to the point of burnout, and I also acknowledge some of the outstanding work that does happen at the Royal Stoke.
But I also want to correct the false narrative that this is a result of more people turning up to A&E. It is not A and E attendance figures at the Royal Stoke remain broadly stable, so I believe deeper questions need to be asked regarding the overall culture and patient flow through the system and response of senior leadership. In August, the CQC conducted an inspection of A and E and correctly instructed that the 15 corridor care spaces at the Royal Stoke were closed.
And I support the principle behind that decision. But closing those spaces does not address the problems that led to patients being treated in corridors in the first place, nor have those closures caused these long standing ambulance delays, which existed before. In September 2025, NHS England took enforcement action against H&M. Yet a year later, average ambulance handover delays at the Royal Stoke still hit two hours this September. So there has been a failure of oversight and accountability.
Having attended the recent H&M board meeting and spoken with the ICB chair, I acknowledge that actions are being taken to address the problem and I am pleased that, on my suggestion, the ICB chair has agreed to convene a joint meeting of senior people and MPs to address the issue of ambulance handover delays. However, I feel that more needs to be done and questions raised as to how we got to this situation in the first place. My constituents deserve safe, timely treatment.
Our frontline staff deserve a system that allows them to do their job properly. So I ask the minister directly, will she commit to taking direct oversight of ambulance handover delays at the Royal Stoke Commission, an independent inquiry, and set a clear timetable for improvement.
Guidance set by NHS England specifies that this should take place within 15 minutes of an ambulance arriving at a hospital between April and September this year. The average wait at the Royal Stoke was one hour and 33 minutes, and the longest was 17 hours and 41 minutes. Only 16% of handovers met the 15 minute standard, making Royal Stoke the worst performing hospital in the West Midlands. On that measure and House of Commons research indicates it's the third worst in the country.
We know that such handover delays cause harm and increase the number of avoidable deaths. This is not a recent problem. The trust's handover times have been some of the longest in the country, most months since 2023, and I want to be clear that this is not an attack on frontline NHS staff. Our paramedics, ambulance crews and emergency department staff are working under immense, immense pressure, often to the point of burnout, and I also acknowledge some of the outstanding work that does happen at the Royal Stoke.
But I also want to correct the false narrative that this is a result of more people turning up to A&E. It is not A and E attendance figures at the Royal Stoke remain broadly stable, so I believe deeper questions need to be asked regarding the overall culture and patient flow through the system and response of senior leadership. In August, the CQC conducted an inspection of A and E and correctly instructed that the 15 corridor care spaces at the Royal Stoke were closed.
And I support the principle behind that decision. But closing those spaces does not address the problems that led to patients being treated in corridors in the first place, nor have those closures caused these long standing ambulance delays, which existed before. In September 2025, NHS England took enforcement action against H&M. Yet a year later, average ambulance handover delays at the Royal Stoke still hit two hours this September. So there has been a failure of oversight and accountability.
Having attended the recent H&M board meeting and spoken with the ICB chair, I acknowledge that actions are being taken to address the problem and I am pleased that, on my suggestion, the ICB chair has agreed to convene a joint meeting of senior people and MPs to address the issue of ambulance handover delays. However, I feel that more needs to be done and questions raised as to how we got to this situation in the first place. My constituents deserve safe, timely treatment.
Our frontline staff deserve a system that allows them to do their job properly. So I ask the minister directly, will she commit to taking direct oversight of ambulance handover delays at the Royal Stoke Commission, an independent inquiry, and set a clear timetable for improvement.
15:04
Speaker 11
-
Speaker 11
Steve Dunning Thank you, Mr. Chair. May I say it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I may may I congratulate the member for Chelmsford in securing this extremely important debate. I serve a population of frail, elderly people. Well, one of the most. We have the highest numbers of frail elderly and the irony is that our hospital is frail and elderly. It's the third oldest in the country, and the.
And the estate here, the poor quality of it massively impacts in the service that's able to be delivered to my community. Over 80% of it is not fit for purpose. We were one of those new hospitals that was promised under the previous conservative government. Sadly, we are now in wave two. I'd also like to reflect on this, how this has impacted on over 700 sewage leaks across the hospital in recent years. That impacts on clinical areas, and you can just draw your own conclusions how this has shunted treatment for patients down the line.
I'd like, particularly now, to focus on the tower block at Torbay. It is swathed in in scaffolding. But it's it's to stop bits of it falling off and braining patients. And in February this year, myself, the member for Newton Abbot and the member for South Devon all wrote to the hospitals minister backing our NHS managers where they were desperately in need of the tower block being sorted out, an £8 million being invested in it, we wrote again.
I met with the minister, the hospitals minister in September and again, bang the drum. We got £1.8 million rather than the £8 million . Somerset and Devon Fire Service have now served a fire safety notice on our trust, saying that they have serious safety concerns for patients. The CQC have served another warning notice just in the last few days. The Chickens minister have now come home to roost and we need action.
We need the cheque in the post. As I asked previously earlier in September to back this, you know, fire safety within the tower block, the the the staff are doing incredible work. The patients deserve better. Will the minister please meet with myself and other colleagues from South Devon constituencies to explore what the impact of this fire safety certificate is and. And also the CQC, because there are rumours swirling around the internet about closures of beds in Torbay Hospital.
Thank you.
And the estate here, the poor quality of it massively impacts in the service that's able to be delivered to my community. Over 80% of it is not fit for purpose. We were one of those new hospitals that was promised under the previous conservative government. Sadly, we are now in wave two. I'd also like to reflect on this, how this has impacted on over 700 sewage leaks across the hospital in recent years. That impacts on clinical areas, and you can just draw your own conclusions how this has shunted treatment for patients down the line.
I'd like, particularly now, to focus on the tower block at Torbay. It is swathed in in scaffolding. But it's it's to stop bits of it falling off and braining patients. And in February this year, myself, the member for Newton Abbot and the member for South Devon all wrote to the hospitals minister backing our NHS managers where they were desperately in need of the tower block being sorted out, an £8 million being invested in it, we wrote again.
I met with the minister, the hospitals minister in September and again, bang the drum. We got £1.8 million rather than the £8 million . Somerset and Devon Fire Service have now served a fire safety notice on our trust, saying that they have serious safety concerns for patients. The CQC have served another warning notice just in the last few days. The Chickens minister have now come home to roost and we need action.
We need the cheque in the post. As I asked previously earlier in September to back this, you know, fire safety within the tower block, the the the staff are doing incredible work. The patients deserve better. Will the minister please meet with myself and other colleagues from South Devon constituencies to explore what the impact of this fire safety certificate is and. And also the CQC, because there are rumours swirling around the internet about closures of beds in Torbay Hospital.
Thank you.
15:07
15:07
15:07
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Serve under your chairmanship, and I'd like to commend the member for Chelmsford for bringing forward this debate, which is named a politely on underperforming trusts. It's Breast Cancer Awareness Month, and I'll be talking about breast cancer failings at my local trust, County Durham and Darlington. In April 2025, the trust began going through case files of women who had been patients of their breast services between 2023 and 2025. Of the 538 women whose cases have been reviewed, 321 of them experienced some form of harm.
77 women suffered significant harm. 20 women underwent unnecessary mastectomies, and the trust has confirmed that one woman has died and are currently investigating the situation around that. Can we just take a moment to reflect on that? The women in this room know rightly what pain is deemed for us to endure and put up with, but to hear that women put their trust in our NHS at a time of great stress and anxiety and had their breasts removed unnecessarily is truly abhorrent.
The trust has rightly changed leadership and are now undertaking a further review of the treatment given to women by the breast services from 2015. There are a further 4500 women whose cases need to be reviewed by specialists. The current rate of review of 538 cases a year is going to mean that without further resource to fund more specialists to review these cases, the process could go well into the 2030s. Recent Health Service Journalists Journal modelling estimates that the work could cost the trust £4.5 million, and the trust does not get any financial support for this work, which I find counterintuitive as the victims need answers and justice, and the trust must learn the lessons of what went wrong , whilst also carrying out their vital duties.
Campaigners are calling for a full public inquiry and I support them. I understand why, but I fear it will take years and years for answers and lessons to be learnt. The Prime Minister recently agreed in a BBC interview that of course, there needs to be the fullest possible inquiry and those affected will get the answers they need. He said that there are different routes to the truth, but the question I would ask of the minister is how, without additional resources, can the trust be expected to keep the other services running effectively? While conducting this inquiry, they inevitably go into debt and probably be bailed out by the Department of Health and Social Care.
So the taxpayer surely, given that we've got the health bill going through the House, a bill that's focused on abolishing NHS England and giving direct powers back to the Secretary of State, we have the right legislative opportunity to change the culture from fearing and fighting for scrutiny to funding it and facilitating it. Those trusts are trusts needs to provide the answers and support the affected patients in a timely and compassionate manner, and to improve and change their services, to gather the information needed and necessary to do that.
And I think we all in this House agree that across the country, patients deserve better.
77 women suffered significant harm. 20 women underwent unnecessary mastectomies, and the trust has confirmed that one woman has died and are currently investigating the situation around that. Can we just take a moment to reflect on that? The women in this room know rightly what pain is deemed for us to endure and put up with, but to hear that women put their trust in our NHS at a time of great stress and anxiety and had their breasts removed unnecessarily is truly abhorrent.
The trust has rightly changed leadership and are now undertaking a further review of the treatment given to women by the breast services from 2015. There are a further 4500 women whose cases need to be reviewed by specialists. The current rate of review of 538 cases a year is going to mean that without further resource to fund more specialists to review these cases, the process could go well into the 2030s. Recent Health Service Journalists Journal modelling estimates that the work could cost the trust £4.5 million, and the trust does not get any financial support for this work, which I find counterintuitive as the victims need answers and justice, and the trust must learn the lessons of what went wrong , whilst also carrying out their vital duties.
Campaigners are calling for a full public inquiry and I support them. I understand why, but I fear it will take years and years for answers and lessons to be learnt. The Prime Minister recently agreed in a BBC interview that of course, there needs to be the fullest possible inquiry and those affected will get the answers they need. He said that there are different routes to the truth, but the question I would ask of the minister is how, without additional resources, can the trust be expected to keep the other services running effectively? While conducting this inquiry, they inevitably go into debt and probably be bailed out by the Department of Health and Social Care.
So the taxpayer surely, given that we've got the health bill going through the House, a bill that's focused on abolishing NHS England and giving direct powers back to the Secretary of State, we have the right legislative opportunity to change the culture from fearing and fighting for scrutiny to funding it and facilitating it. Those trusts are trusts needs to provide the answers and support the affected patients in a timely and compassionate manner, and to improve and change their services, to gather the information needed and necessary to do that.
And I think we all in this House agree that across the country, patients deserve better.
15:10
15:10
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
Thank you. Mr. Stewart, do you serve with you in the chair? And I'm grateful to the honourable member for Chelmsford for securing this debate. When we discuss underperforming trusts, we must recognise that some NHS trusts are operating in circumstances that would challenge even the very best management teams. The Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust serves a largely rural and coastal population, with an ageing demographic, workforce pressures and significant barriers to access.
So I don't, in my speech, want to blame the Royal Devon leadership team and this is certainly very certainly not about blaming the hard working staff because they are doing a brilliant job in very trying circumstances. But let's face it, the geography and the demographics are stacked against them. The chief medical officer, Sir Chris Whitty, has repeatedly highlighted the unique health challenges facing rural and coastal communities, including when he visited Devon in May this year.
Sir Chris has warned the health challenges of coastal towns and attracting staff in these areas is significantly harder, noting that transport links are often limited. In his 2023 report, Sir Chris warned that people living in peripheral areas experience issues relating to accessing primary and secondary healthcare, domiciliary care, medicines, shopping and transport. The response times, he went on of healthcare professionals are often longer because of the distances involved, which is particularly important for emergency presentations.
Steve Brown, who is the director for Public Health Devon, said In Devon our records show that some people are dying up to 15 years earlier than they should because essential building blocks of health, like reliable transport and services that people can reach, are missing. I have a constituent, Hilary Roberts Arnold from Seaton, who wrote to me to describe the lack of transport and the difficulty of getting services in East Devon. Her husband is increasingly frail and suffers from skin cancer.
Until recently, he attended dermatology services at Axminster Hospital, seven and a half miles away. These local services are now gone. Patients are forced instead to trek to Exeter if they can. For her and for her husband, that would be 22 miles away and is simply not possible. It's just too challenging a distance for them to trek. So his cancer is not being dealt with as a result. And the Dr.
told me that this is a workforce and capacity issue, not a reflection of the clinical priority we place on patient care. If government oversight of NHS trusts is to be meaningful, it must recognise the realities of rural and coastal healthcare and weight the funding accordingly. Thank you. You.
So I don't, in my speech, want to blame the Royal Devon leadership team and this is certainly very certainly not about blaming the hard working staff because they are doing a brilliant job in very trying circumstances. But let's face it, the geography and the demographics are stacked against them. The chief medical officer, Sir Chris Whitty, has repeatedly highlighted the unique health challenges facing rural and coastal communities, including when he visited Devon in May this year.
Sir Chris has warned the health challenges of coastal towns and attracting staff in these areas is significantly harder, noting that transport links are often limited. In his 2023 report, Sir Chris warned that people living in peripheral areas experience issues relating to accessing primary and secondary healthcare, domiciliary care, medicines, shopping and transport. The response times, he went on of healthcare professionals are often longer because of the distances involved, which is particularly important for emergency presentations.
Steve Brown, who is the director for Public Health Devon, said In Devon our records show that some people are dying up to 15 years earlier than they should because essential building blocks of health, like reliable transport and services that people can reach, are missing. I have a constituent, Hilary Roberts Arnold from Seaton, who wrote to me to describe the lack of transport and the difficulty of getting services in East Devon. Her husband is increasingly frail and suffers from skin cancer.
Until recently, he attended dermatology services at Axminster Hospital, seven and a half miles away. These local services are now gone. Patients are forced instead to trek to Exeter if they can. For her and for her husband, that would be 22 miles away and is simply not possible. It's just too challenging a distance for them to trek. So his cancer is not being dealt with as a result. And the Dr.
told me that this is a workforce and capacity issue, not a reflection of the clinical priority we place on patient care. If government oversight of NHS trusts is to be meaningful, it must recognise the realities of rural and coastal healthcare and weight the funding accordingly. Thank you. You.
15:13
15:13
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
It's an honour to serve under your chairmanship. And thank you to the honourable member for Chelmsford for securing this vital debate. The debate could not be more timely for my constituents, and I want to use my contribution to offer a warning from Wales about what happens when governments distance themselves from the decisions being taken by NHS trusts or boards under their control. Community hospitals across Powis, including in Knighton , Wells, Welshpool and McCandless face a perilous future with vital local services potentially being lost.
Paris Teaching Health Board is currently running a consultation called Better Together, which proposes that the number of hospital beds be slashed from 146 to as few as 60, whilst minor injuries units, with further cuts being made to minor injuries units, mental health services and X-ray units. My constituents and I fear that these proposals essentially amount to closure by stealth for some hospitals, particularly wells and osteogenesis. All of the GP practices in Powis have written to express their concerns about these proposals.
The proposals have provoked enormous public opposition, with nearly 10,000 people signing my petition against the cuts and hundreds attending public meetings that I've organised across the county. At the same time, in order to save money, the same health board has been slowing down treatment times for patients awaiting surgery in neighbouring health boards and trusts in Shropshire and Herefordshire. Yet despite this, the new Plaid Cymru Welsh Government has repeatedly refused to intervene, insisting that these are operational matters for the health board.
So we now face the extraordinary situation where a health board is putting forward proposals that appear to directly contradict its government's own stated policy to improve step down care. And those Welsh ministers refused to take responsibility and step in before it's too late. The health boards and trusts in Wales are accountable to the Welsh health Minister. Yet we've seen successive Welsh health ministers refusing to take responsibility over their funding.
Welsh ministers are responsible for the financial contributions of the health boards. They cannot wash their hands of the consequences when those boards propose deep cuts to frontline services. And it's striking that while governments elsewhere in the UK have sought to strengthen scrutiny and intervention in struggling NHS trusts, the approach in Wales has too often been to place greater distance between the ministers and the local health boards, and that's why it's important for the Welsh Health Minister to take responsibility for his job and the Welsh Health Service that he runs.
Listen to the people of Powis and scrap these proposals for the hospital beds across our communities to be removed.
Paris Teaching Health Board is currently running a consultation called Better Together, which proposes that the number of hospital beds be slashed from 146 to as few as 60, whilst minor injuries units, with further cuts being made to minor injuries units, mental health services and X-ray units. My constituents and I fear that these proposals essentially amount to closure by stealth for some hospitals, particularly wells and osteogenesis. All of the GP practices in Powis have written to express their concerns about these proposals.
The proposals have provoked enormous public opposition, with nearly 10,000 people signing my petition against the cuts and hundreds attending public meetings that I've organised across the county. At the same time, in order to save money, the same health board has been slowing down treatment times for patients awaiting surgery in neighbouring health boards and trusts in Shropshire and Herefordshire. Yet despite this, the new Plaid Cymru Welsh Government has repeatedly refused to intervene, insisting that these are operational matters for the health board.
So we now face the extraordinary situation where a health board is putting forward proposals that appear to directly contradict its government's own stated policy to improve step down care. And those Welsh ministers refused to take responsibility and step in before it's too late. The health boards and trusts in Wales are accountable to the Welsh health Minister. Yet we've seen successive Welsh health ministers refusing to take responsibility over their funding.
Welsh ministers are responsible for the financial contributions of the health boards. They cannot wash their hands of the consequences when those boards propose deep cuts to frontline services. And it's striking that while governments elsewhere in the UK have sought to strengthen scrutiny and intervention in struggling NHS trusts, the approach in Wales has too often been to place greater distance between the ministers and the local health boards, and that's why it's important for the Welsh Health Minister to take responsibility for his job and the Welsh Health Service that he runs.
Listen to the people of Powis and scrap these proposals for the hospital beds across our communities to be removed.
15:16
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Real pleasure to serve on your ship. A big thank you to the Honourable Lady for Chelmsford for for raising this issue and for giving us a chance to participate. The new intensive recovery programme has identified several NHS trusts in England which are underperforming as a result of waiting lists, persistent financial difficulties and leadership instability. The trust identified include North Cumbria, Mid and South Essex, Hull, Northern Lincolnshire, Goole and East Kent.
The performance across these trusts and beyond has raised serious questions about whether patients in England are receiving consistent access to cancer treatment. I want the focus of a conference chairman on on cancer treatment in particular. NHS, of course, is a long standing target of 85% of patients should begin treatment within 62 days of an urgent referral for suspected cancer. However, performance at many trusts is substantially beneath us, which is having serious consequences on patient outcomes.
Just as one example, in 2023, a patient in Mid and South Essex Hospital died and this was linked to the trust failed to meet any of the NHS. England's cancer waiting time targets and some. And this trust. Only 47.7% of patients began treatment within 62 days and by 2025 the number was further declined. In other words, it was getting worse. County Durham and Darlington referred to it. Trust that the situation is similar.
Significant failings were identified in breast cancer care. The Honourable Lady illustrated incredibly well a review of care received by women between 2023 and 2020, 532 women had undergone unnecessary surgery, 20 had experienced delayed diagnosis and a further 78 patients were found to have suffered moderate or severe harm. The review has been committed and demonstrating that the true scale of this issue is likely much bigger than we know. We know of. Analysis of NHS cancer waiting time performance has found that nearly every English NHS trusts missed cancer targets in Northern Ireland.
We have also experienced serious concerns regarding cancer care. One example is the recently called for a public inquiry into urology services at the South Southern Health and Social Care Trust, where it was identified that cervical screening services had reported some results incorrectly, to be told that it was clear and then shortly after that they were told no, it isn't clear is an absolute scandal. This caused patients and families considerable distress. Northern Ireland's waiting times statistics further illustrate the pressure on cancer services.
Some 30% of patients began treatment within 62 days. The percentage has been on a downward decline. So I look to the minister has responsibility for Northern Ireland, has responsibility for the trust here to ensure that the effective oversight and accountability in all our trusts. This is a widespread underperformance. It must be addressed. These failures are undermining public confidence in the health service. A suspected cancer diagnosis is already a distressing experience, and patient outcomes are not being helped by lack of clarity and reassurance.
Thank you.
The performance across these trusts and beyond has raised serious questions about whether patients in England are receiving consistent access to cancer treatment. I want the focus of a conference chairman on on cancer treatment in particular. NHS, of course, is a long standing target of 85% of patients should begin treatment within 62 days of an urgent referral for suspected cancer. However, performance at many trusts is substantially beneath us, which is having serious consequences on patient outcomes.
Just as one example, in 2023, a patient in Mid and South Essex Hospital died and this was linked to the trust failed to meet any of the NHS. England's cancer waiting time targets and some. And this trust. Only 47.7% of patients began treatment within 62 days and by 2025 the number was further declined. In other words, it was getting worse. County Durham and Darlington referred to it. Trust that the situation is similar.
Significant failings were identified in breast cancer care. The Honourable Lady illustrated incredibly well a review of care received by women between 2023 and 2020, 532 women had undergone unnecessary surgery, 20 had experienced delayed diagnosis and a further 78 patients were found to have suffered moderate or severe harm. The review has been committed and demonstrating that the true scale of this issue is likely much bigger than we know. We know of. Analysis of NHS cancer waiting time performance has found that nearly every English NHS trusts missed cancer targets in Northern Ireland.
We have also experienced serious concerns regarding cancer care. One example is the recently called for a public inquiry into urology services at the South Southern Health and Social Care Trust, where it was identified that cervical screening services had reported some results incorrectly, to be told that it was clear and then shortly after that they were told no, it isn't clear is an absolute scandal. This caused patients and families considerable distress. Northern Ireland's waiting times statistics further illustrate the pressure on cancer services.
Some 30% of patients began treatment within 62 days. The percentage has been on a downward decline. So I look to the minister has responsibility for Northern Ireland, has responsibility for the trust here to ensure that the effective oversight and accountability in all our trusts. This is a widespread underperformance. It must be addressed. These failures are undermining public confidence in the health service. A suspected cancer diagnosis is already a distressing experience, and patient outcomes are not being helped by lack of clarity and reassurance.
Thank you.
15:19
15:19
Speaker 15
-
Speaker 15
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Stewart. And I'd also like to thank my honourable member for securing this debate, because despite the hard work of staff, the performance of our NHS trust from maternity stroke has been at the forefront of people's minds. Due to underperformance. Since the merger, Yeovil Hospital has been the poor relation. Thankfully, we managed to get our maternity unit in Yeovil safely reopened after CQC report found serious failings and the trust closed the unit.
We've got government oversight as Baroness Amos refused our trust's maternity services during the closure and she concluded from evidence we collected during our visit and the concerns expressed by staff, we remain concerned about patient safety at Yeovil District Hospital. I am hearing this too, and so I really want to hear from the minister about particular steps being taken now to improve oversight and supporting patient safety and staff in rural maternity units. Another issue that has been a real priority for people in Yeovil has been stroke services.
After not meeting targets, the NHS in Somerset closed Yeovil hyper acute stroke unit. As part of the service restructure. Patients will now have to travel to hospitals in Taunton or Dorchester. Local campaigners and I kept being told that there is strong evidence base to suggest a restructure would improve the service. But when we did a freedom of information request, we found data suggesting that in 2024, stroke patients from Yeovil were taken to Taunton, only 13% would have made it within needle within the target call to needle time of 180 minutes, and only 30% would have made it to hospital in Dorchester in time.
Campaigners and I have been working with the NHS in Somerset to get things like pre-hospital video triage to help cut waiting times and a refurbished acute stroke unit at Yeovil Hospital. But we are still really concerned about the travel times and the outcomes. That is why I think we really need government oversight, specifically a review of stroke services in rural areas, focusing on the evidence that the consultant process around service provision, health outcome for patients and travel times.
What we need is a proper national picture of how rural areas are being impacted by these service restructures and mergers, because what works for somewhere like Bristol or London will not always work for South Somerset and rural areas. Sadly, across our entire NHS trust I have heard really concerning reports of bullying and poor work culture. That is why I believe the government urgently needs to improve oversight of working cultures and bullying in NHS trusts, and that this should start with training for leadership teams across the NHS trust on bullying because where there is poor performance, working culture is often a key factor.
So there is real scope for improvement. Oversight of NHS trusts like ours in Somerset. Ultimately, however, without government support, without funding, we are not going to be able to improve our NHS services.
We've got government oversight as Baroness Amos refused our trust's maternity services during the closure and she concluded from evidence we collected during our visit and the concerns expressed by staff, we remain concerned about patient safety at Yeovil District Hospital. I am hearing this too, and so I really want to hear from the minister about particular steps being taken now to improve oversight and supporting patient safety and staff in rural maternity units. Another issue that has been a real priority for people in Yeovil has been stroke services.
After not meeting targets, the NHS in Somerset closed Yeovil hyper acute stroke unit. As part of the service restructure. Patients will now have to travel to hospitals in Taunton or Dorchester. Local campaigners and I kept being told that there is strong evidence base to suggest a restructure would improve the service. But when we did a freedom of information request, we found data suggesting that in 2024, stroke patients from Yeovil were taken to Taunton, only 13% would have made it within needle within the target call to needle time of 180 minutes, and only 30% would have made it to hospital in Dorchester in time.
Campaigners and I have been working with the NHS in Somerset to get things like pre-hospital video triage to help cut waiting times and a refurbished acute stroke unit at Yeovil Hospital. But we are still really concerned about the travel times and the outcomes. That is why I think we really need government oversight, specifically a review of stroke services in rural areas, focusing on the evidence that the consultant process around service provision, health outcome for patients and travel times.
What we need is a proper national picture of how rural areas are being impacted by these service restructures and mergers, because what works for somewhere like Bristol or London will not always work for South Somerset and rural areas. Sadly, across our entire NHS trust I have heard really concerning reports of bullying and poor work culture. That is why I believe the government urgently needs to improve oversight of working cultures and bullying in NHS trusts, and that this should start with training for leadership teams across the NHS trust on bullying because where there is poor performance, working culture is often a key factor.
So there is real scope for improvement. Oversight of NHS trusts like ours in Somerset. Ultimately, however, without government support, without funding, we are not going to be able to improve our NHS services.
15:22
15:22
15:22
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
I appreciate you. Allow me to speak the last moment, and it's an honour to speak under your chairmanship. And also thank you to the honourable member for Chelmsford for bringing this very important and very timely debate to this Hall. So I want to be clear that while the list of figures I'm about to bring forward are concerning, I do not place any of the burden or blame on the shoulders of the frontline staff. Indeed, the more concerning the figures, the more gratitude and appreciation I show to the staff for enduring these challenging work environments and the challenging circumstances in which they turn up each day, giving the highest quality of care.
Indeed, so much so that whistleblowers have brought to my attention at great personal risks to their career concerns and details about the state of care and operational functionality at Basildon Hospital. And if I can give you a very quick example of that, I had a surgeon reach out to me stating how senior management had come in and put into place an organisation and a throughput practice that they thought was best, while the surgeon was sat there with his own experience, seeing that surgeries were very often left empty because of the way processes were being put forward and forced upon them.
And indeed, since some changes have been brought in place, although I have not been able to personally verify this, it was brought to me by a consultant, said that they've actually hired more management staff than they have hired consultants in the last couple of years. So first, just some figures. Now, while I have almost a dozen bullet points here, and almost every single one is rather concerning, I think it's suffice to say that South Essex, Mid and South Essex Trust, of which Basildon Hospital is part and which is in my constituency of South Basildon and East Thurrock.
It suffice to say that it ranks 131st out of 134. The quality the Care Quality Commission ranked them as inadequate. So concerned were they with state of affairs there that they actually performed multiple repeat visits to try and improve the state of things. Now, complaining alone is not enough, but there are two points that the honourable member for Chelmsford raised that I think are really quite striking. The first is problems should not be obvious.
I should not turn up as a layman to medical practice and be able to spot clear errors. Now, I remember visiting the mental health ward there. There was a foyer in which there was just overgrown grass, weeds up to your chest, garbage and concrete strewn everywhere. And I was walking around with the CEO at the time and I said, oh, what's happened here? And he turned around in complete shock, as if he'd never seen it before, and said, oh, I'm not sure.
You know, sometimes you just go nose blind, staggering, staggering. So, so that's where the problems, I think, don't just start. But that's the standard of things. And I want to say on top of that, while a lot of my constituents will be concerned to hear that Basildon Hospital was ranked poorly, I do also want to stick up for the staff there and say that I personally will continue to use that hospital because I recognise how important it is, so I'll just thank this one last point as I'm being encouraged to close down.
Indeed, so much so that whistleblowers have brought to my attention at great personal risks to their career concerns and details about the state of care and operational functionality at Basildon Hospital. And if I can give you a very quick example of that, I had a surgeon reach out to me stating how senior management had come in and put into place an organisation and a throughput practice that they thought was best, while the surgeon was sat there with his own experience, seeing that surgeries were very often left empty because of the way processes were being put forward and forced upon them.
And indeed, since some changes have been brought in place, although I have not been able to personally verify this, it was brought to me by a consultant, said that they've actually hired more management staff than they have hired consultants in the last couple of years. So first, just some figures. Now, while I have almost a dozen bullet points here, and almost every single one is rather concerning, I think it's suffice to say that South Essex, Mid and South Essex Trust, of which Basildon Hospital is part and which is in my constituency of South Basildon and East Thurrock.
It suffice to say that it ranks 131st out of 134. The quality the Care Quality Commission ranked them as inadequate. So concerned were they with state of affairs there that they actually performed multiple repeat visits to try and improve the state of things. Now, complaining alone is not enough, but there are two points that the honourable member for Chelmsford raised that I think are really quite striking. The first is problems should not be obvious.
I should not turn up as a layman to medical practice and be able to spot clear errors. Now, I remember visiting the mental health ward there. There was a foyer in which there was just overgrown grass, weeds up to your chest, garbage and concrete strewn everywhere. And I was walking around with the CEO at the time and I said, oh, what's happened here? And he turned around in complete shock, as if he'd never seen it before, and said, oh, I'm not sure.
You know, sometimes you just go nose blind, staggering, staggering. So, so that's where the problems, I think, don't just start. But that's the standard of things. And I want to say on top of that, while a lot of my constituents will be concerned to hear that Basildon Hospital was ranked poorly, I do also want to stick up for the staff there and say that I personally will continue to use that hospital because I recognise how important it is, so I'll just thank this one last point as I'm being encouraged to close down.
15:25
15:25
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
Thank you very much, Mr. Stewart. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I congratulate my hon. Friend the member for Chelmsford for securing this important debate. Tackling under-performing NHS trusts is essential if we are serious about taking the necessary strides forward for patient safety and experience, as well as the wellbeing of NHS workers who are suffering anxiety and burnout at an unprecedented and frankly unacceptable scale. Liberal Democrats have put forward our robust plan to end corridor care and transform patient safety, essential measures needed to relieve pressure and fix our NHS and indeed relieve the pressure at both the front door and the back door of the service.
Years of conservative mismanagement and neglect of the NHS has left many trusts on their knees, with huge challenges from which to recover, and the onus is now on the new Labour government, with their intensive recovery programme to finally create the right conditions for failing trusts to succeed where its predecessors have failed. I will give way.
Years of conservative mismanagement and neglect of the NHS has left many trusts on their knees, with huge challenges from which to recover, and the onus is now on the new Labour government, with their intensive recovery programme to finally create the right conditions for failing trusts to succeed where its predecessors have failed. I will give way.
15:26
15:26
15:26
Speaker 18
-
Speaker 18
Friend for giving way. You talk about the challenges NHS trusts are facing. My local hospital, Torbay Hospital, has an ageing tower block which has now received a fire enforcement notice, which could affect up to a quarter of the beds in the hospital. Panic is spreading today in the local community about what this means for future treatment. Would my hon. Friend agree with me that when things become as urgent as this, at a quarter of the beds in the hospital might be closed by the fire brigade that the government desperately needs to bring forward the new hospitals funding programme, so that repair and remedial work can begin immediately to restore this part of the hospital.
15:27
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
I do agree with her, and I echo her call, and I think that the state that people work in is really part of the fundamental problem that we're trying to tackle across the NHS. But I hope all the members here who have made excellent speeches highlighting shocking failures in their own trusts, can take heart from the fact that it is possible to tackle underperforming trusts. In my time as MP for North Shropshire, I have seen meaningful changes for my constituents.
From 2018 to 2023, Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital Trust was obviously underperforming , with accuracy inspections consistently rating it as an adequate and that included inadequate levels of safety and services, something reflected in absolutely horrifying stories received at the time in my inbox and those of the other Shropshire MPs and on doorsteps, and as well as a churn in the management team that led to constant uncertainty about what was going to have there happen there. The human consequence of these stories was devastating.
When I was first elected, the overwhelming issue was the abysmal ambulance waiting times related to poor handover times. As the honourable lady for Stoke on Trent South has highlighted at Stoke. I'll never forget the letter I received from a school's headteacher after a pupil dislocated his knee playing football. He and the teachers had waited so long for an ambulance in the dark and cold on a winter night, that the pupil was at risk of developing hypothermia by the time the ambulance arrived.
We heard countless devastating stories, including ones where the ambulance had taken so long to arrive that it was too late that that the outcome was fatal. Now, following a targeted campaign, including joining the West Midlands Ambulance Service team for an eye opening shift, wait times have significantly improved and we see far, far fewer of these cases in the inbox. But challenges remain, not least in corridor care. In the Accident and Emergency department, which has been at times rated as one of the worst in the country.
A constituent told me of the shocking experience of her aunt Kath during this period, who was admitted to Shrewsbury Hospital following a serious stroke one night. Kath fell out of a hospital bed and broke her hip after SAP had failed to put the necessary guardrails up on the side of her bed. She spent nearly half an hour trying to attract the attention of the staff on the ward with the alert bell, but they were so overworked they didn't respond, and in the end, she forced.
She was forced to dial 999 from the floor of the ward. She was left in the ridiculous position of explaining to the call centre staff that she was actually on the floor of a ward in Royal Shrewsbury Hospital before the staff reached her. That can't be right. We heard of many heartbreaking situations where cancer patients scans were unable to take place because waiting lists had meant that they were booked in the wrong order and fatally long waits for diagnosis in some cases.
With the trust failing to hit key targets across the board, and then finally, the Ockenden report in 2022 struck my community with its devastating finding of over 200 preventable deaths of babies and unimaginable harm done to families campaigning and voicing justified anger, which everyone has done today. And working with these ministers at the failings can bring about change. That was essential in Shropshire and although things aren't perfect, it is encouraging to see the improvements that have been made so far.
It's been a really difficult environment for staff to work in, and I'd like to pay tribute to them and the new leadership team for all the hard work that they have put into place, into turning this extremely difficult situation around. The trust's CQC rating has recently been upgraded, although this still requires improvement with emergency department waiting times and understaffing key focuses. But there is much to be pleased with. Reviews have noted a positive culture, and the trust has recently been shortlisted for several awards due to its performance improvements.
So we must celebrate the many trusts in the UK that provide the high levels of care and innovation, and support those making significant improvements for underperforming trusts. It's our duty to our patients and our constituents to make sure that we campaign to bring them up to good
From 2018 to 2023, Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital Trust was obviously underperforming , with accuracy inspections consistently rating it as an adequate and that included inadequate levels of safety and services, something reflected in absolutely horrifying stories received at the time in my inbox and those of the other Shropshire MPs and on doorsteps, and as well as a churn in the management team that led to constant uncertainty about what was going to have there happen there. The human consequence of these stories was devastating.
When I was first elected, the overwhelming issue was the abysmal ambulance waiting times related to poor handover times. As the honourable lady for Stoke on Trent South has highlighted at Stoke. I'll never forget the letter I received from a school's headteacher after a pupil dislocated his knee playing football. He and the teachers had waited so long for an ambulance in the dark and cold on a winter night, that the pupil was at risk of developing hypothermia by the time the ambulance arrived.
We heard countless devastating stories, including ones where the ambulance had taken so long to arrive that it was too late that that the outcome was fatal. Now, following a targeted campaign, including joining the West Midlands Ambulance Service team for an eye opening shift, wait times have significantly improved and we see far, far fewer of these cases in the inbox. But challenges remain, not least in corridor care. In the Accident and Emergency department, which has been at times rated as one of the worst in the country.
A constituent told me of the shocking experience of her aunt Kath during this period, who was admitted to Shrewsbury Hospital following a serious stroke one night. Kath fell out of a hospital bed and broke her hip after SAP had failed to put the necessary guardrails up on the side of her bed. She spent nearly half an hour trying to attract the attention of the staff on the ward with the alert bell, but they were so overworked they didn't respond, and in the end, she forced.
She was forced to dial 999 from the floor of the ward. She was left in the ridiculous position of explaining to the call centre staff that she was actually on the floor of a ward in Royal Shrewsbury Hospital before the staff reached her. That can't be right. We heard of many heartbreaking situations where cancer patients scans were unable to take place because waiting lists had meant that they were booked in the wrong order and fatally long waits for diagnosis in some cases.
With the trust failing to hit key targets across the board, and then finally, the Ockenden report in 2022 struck my community with its devastating finding of over 200 preventable deaths of babies and unimaginable harm done to families campaigning and voicing justified anger, which everyone has done today. And working with these ministers at the failings can bring about change. That was essential in Shropshire and although things aren't perfect, it is encouraging to see the improvements that have been made so far.
It's been a really difficult environment for staff to work in, and I'd like to pay tribute to them and the new leadership team for all the hard work that they have put into place, into turning this extremely difficult situation around. The trust's CQC rating has recently been upgraded, although this still requires improvement with emergency department waiting times and understaffing key focuses. But there is much to be pleased with. Reviews have noted a positive culture, and the trust has recently been shortlisted for several awards due to its performance improvements.
So we must celebrate the many trusts in the UK that provide the high levels of care and innovation, and support those making significant improvements for underperforming trusts. It's our duty to our patients and our constituents to make sure that we campaign to bring them up to good
15:31
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
To bring them up to good standards, and I congratulate everyone here today for doing just that. But if conditions for care are stretched and staff are expected to deliver the impossible with limited time and resources, it's patients who suffer. And how can we transform patient safety? To start, we need to hold failing leaders to account. As I've discussed, reports of. Appointed to a culture of unaccountability among NHS leaders which have accompanied recent scandals and undermine public confidence.
Failing trusts need to be able to held to account, and our amendment to the health Bill would help to do this by retaining the necessary structures for this accountability. First of all, we must retain the independent patient voice Healthwatch, which was established in the wake of the Mid-staffordshire scandal. And while in its infancy, should also be retained because it promises to improve patient safety environment, our amendments would also introduce duties and a standardised framework for the reporting of suspected health system failings and medical malpractice by coroners, medical examiners and members of ICB and NHS trust boards.
Whistleblowing routes to the CQC. The Department for Health and Care and the police would be accompanied by statutory protections and would also place a corresponding duty on senior leadership, senior leadership to escalate concerns they have regarding safety or malpractice to the relevant boards. My colleagues in the other place will be re tabling these amendments at the next stage of the health Bill, and I urge the government to accept them. The third inquiry, yeah.
Failing trusts need to be able to held to account, and our amendment to the health Bill would help to do this by retaining the necessary structures for this accountability. First of all, we must retain the independent patient voice Healthwatch, which was established in the wake of the Mid-staffordshire scandal. And while in its infancy, should also be retained because it promises to improve patient safety environment, our amendments would also introduce duties and a standardised framework for the reporting of suspected health system failings and medical malpractice by coroners, medical examiners and members of ICB and NHS trust boards.
Whistleblowing routes to the CQC. The Department for Health and Care and the police would be accompanied by statutory protections and would also place a corresponding duty on senior leadership, senior leadership to escalate concerns they have regarding safety or malpractice to the relevant boards. My colleagues in the other place will be re tabling these amendments at the next stage of the health Bill, and I urge the government to accept them. The third inquiry, yeah.
15:32
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Generally referred to whistleblowing as the honourable member from the backbenchers who spoke before him. Those the honourable lady, agree that there should be more encouragement for those who do want the whistleblower, but there also needs to be protection for them to ensure that their jobs are protected.
15:33
15:33
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
I fully agree with him. I think that's why ownership has a role to play, because it provides that safe space for people to raise concerns without fearing for their jobs. And also the office of the Guardian, which is also being removed in the health Bill, enables and encourages safe whistleblowing across the NHS. And I think it's important that we retain it. The third inquiry highlighted constant reorganisation as a problem as well, and I received in my inbox this week notification that Shropshire, Telford and Wrekin ICB, which has clustered with Stoke and Staffordshire ICB in order to get ready for a merger of those two icbs that that's all on hold now because it doesn't line up with local government reorganisation.
This is really, really problematic for local health services when their management teams don't know whether they're coming or going from one month to the next. And I would urge the minister to deal with that problem as well. It's clear that urgent action is needed to turn around underperforming trusts for the safety of their patients, the welfare of their staff and the value that's delivered for the taxpayer. So I hope the government will look at the measures we've outlined and accept some of those in the health bill as it passes through the House of Lords, so that we can really affect people's lives and put back their confidence in the NHS, that it will be there for them when they most need it.
This is really, really problematic for local health services when their management teams don't know whether they're coming or going from one month to the next. And I would urge the minister to deal with that problem as well. It's clear that urgent action is needed to turn around underperforming trusts for the safety of their patients, the welfare of their staff and the value that's delivered for the taxpayer. So I hope the government will look at the measures we've outlined and accept some of those in the health bill as it passes through the House of Lords, so that we can really affect people's lives and put back their confidence in the NHS, that it will be there for them when they most need it.
15:34
15:34
15:34
Speaker 20
-
Speaker 20
Thank you sir. Great. Mr. Stewart and thank you. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this afternoon. I'd like to congratulate the honourable lady on securing the debate on a very important subject that is clearly important to her constituents, but is important to all of us right across the country. The performance of NHS is key to the health of the nation. It gives us all the best chance of good health, of recovery, which is important for our social wellbeing and brings economic benefits to.
The first question is how do we know which trusts are performing well and which trusts are not? First, we need to decide what good performance looks like, and we can look at that in a couple of ways, particularly in relation to outcome and experience. And both are important. The outcome, for example, may be a death. This will come to us all eventually, and the experience may be one that's in comfort in line with the wishes of the individuals.
The experience may be as good as it can be delivered. Conversely, one could have, on the face of it, a very good outcome from the trust in terms of surgical outcome would be very good, but have a very poor experience of care during that experience. So there are various ways to measure it. Experience is measured in a number of different ways. Individual staff, such as consultants, have, as part of their appraisal and revalidation patient feedback.
There is the friends and family test enabling people to give anonymous feedback. One can measure the number of complaints or compliments, and trusts can do their own surveys, but these are all to some extent internal processes. I will briefly.
The first question is how do we know which trusts are performing well and which trusts are not? First, we need to decide what good performance looks like, and we can look at that in a couple of ways, particularly in relation to outcome and experience. And both are important. The outcome, for example, may be a death. This will come to us all eventually, and the experience may be one that's in comfort in line with the wishes of the individuals.
The experience may be as good as it can be delivered. Conversely, one could have, on the face of it, a very good outcome from the trust in terms of surgical outcome would be very good, but have a very poor experience of care during that experience. So there are various ways to measure it. Experience is measured in a number of different ways. Individual staff, such as consultants, have, as part of their appraisal and revalidation patient feedback.
There is the friends and family test enabling people to give anonymous feedback. One can measure the number of complaints or compliments, and trusts can do their own surveys, but these are all to some extent internal processes. I will briefly.
15:35
15:36
15:36
15:36
Speaker 20
-
Speaker 20
you. Sorry the microphone went off, but it has just come back on again, so I hope that it will be more more effective. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Right. So the the they're mostly internal. The Healthwatch itself is an independent, patient voice looking at people's experience across the health service in a way that's independent of government.
Now, the government plan to use part of the health bill, abolish Healthwatch and bring it inside the department. And I wonder if the government could comment on whether or not they're still planning to do so. We know that the Prime Minister, when he was mayor of Greater Manchester and in charge of the ICB there, wrote to the government suggesting that may be the wrong path. Does he still think so as Prime Minister? And what instructions does she had in relation to that? Because I think people are sometimes frightened to provide feedback to trusts and they will be more willing to do so in the event that they have confidence that they're being heard independently.
The other ways of measuring experience the government do are related to waiting times. So how long it takes to be seen in clinic, how long it takes to be seen in A&E, how long it takes from the decision to admit a patient to actually admitting them, how long it takes for a procedure or an operation. And the government produced lots and lots and lots and lots of figures, but a lot of them, I'm afraid, are going in the wrong direction.
So they have a dashboard where they look at the referral to treat statistics. And I'm afraid the waiting lists are rising. Actually, they had reached a low point in March 2026, just after you'll remember the reports of exceptional numbers of removals, but they've now risen 222,000 in the last four months. For those requiring a procedure or an operation, I'm afraid to say the numbers waiting are actually higher than they were at the general election.
For people waiting for more than 12 hours after in A&E, after a decision to admit them from the emergency department. There are more. More waiting, many more waiting this year than there were in 2024. And staff sickness rates, which were mentioned by an honourable member earlier in the debate, are also consistently higher than they were before the general election, so statistics are not going in the right direction across the NHS.
Other ways that the government measure outcomes include financial management of a trust, leadership and government metrics, the number of procedures performed, the number of Never events and CQC inspections. But again, with the CQC, they're planning to fold h seb into the CQC, which so many commentators have guarded against. And I know the Liberal Democrats and US as opposition have guarded against the abolition of H. Seb and I hope that the government, when it takes this through the Lords in Committee in the next week or two, will think again.
They're also planning to roll a number of other things into the CQC at the same time, including events management, and I wonder if they're asking an organisation which the government acknowledge has been struggling to take on too much. So if poor performance is is is identified, who is responsible? Is it the consultant or the matron? Is it the director of sleeves? Is it the chief exec or the chair? If ultimately the trust is underperforming at the moment there are governors that are supposed to hold the board to account.
Well, the health service, the health bill abolishes those, the icbs the commissioners can hold the trust to account, but their budgets have been halved. So will they have the capacity to do so? Many of them have merged. Some of those mergers have been paused by government. This is all a distraction. NHS England has a role, but they are being abolished too, and the head count in DHS and NHS England overall is apparently to be halved.
How will they have the bandwidth in order to be able to provide the scrutiny that the government says it's going to have? Having identified the management of poor performance, the government chose five trusts North Cumbria, Mid and South Essex, Hull University Teaching Hospitals, North Lincolnshire and Goole and East Kent to have special intensive recovery program in March 2026. But it's not clear what has been instituted in these trusts, and it's also not clear what outcomes this is developing or how long this will last and what what the what the government will do for those trusts who fall just outside this group of five, how will they improve variability between trusts that don't fall into the bottom cohort? And how did they choose the five trusts that they've chosen? Because, as we've heard earlier, there are a number of metrics by which some trusts could be considered in the bottom five and that they weren't they weren't chosen.
And some metrics by which those that were chosen may not be in the bottom five. So how has the minister chosen those trusts, and how does she intend to improve those that don't fall into her chosen few? The other thing I wanted to raise was the the workforce. So the government has promised a workforce plan, but workforce is the most important thing. We've heard as much many, many, many honourable members and honourable members today have spoken about the really good staff that they have in their trust, working extremely hard in very difficult conditions, and the government, previous conservative government, had developed a long term workforce plan.
Now this government decided it wanted its own workforce plan and it won the election. It's very much entitled to do so, but it still hasn't written it. It promised it. By the end of 2025, we're rapidly approaching the end of 2026, and it's still not with us. So can the minister.
Now, the government plan to use part of the health bill, abolish Healthwatch and bring it inside the department. And I wonder if the government could comment on whether or not they're still planning to do so. We know that the Prime Minister, when he was mayor of Greater Manchester and in charge of the ICB there, wrote to the government suggesting that may be the wrong path. Does he still think so as Prime Minister? And what instructions does she had in relation to that? Because I think people are sometimes frightened to provide feedback to trusts and they will be more willing to do so in the event that they have confidence that they're being heard independently.
The other ways of measuring experience the government do are related to waiting times. So how long it takes to be seen in clinic, how long it takes to be seen in A&E, how long it takes from the decision to admit a patient to actually admitting them, how long it takes for a procedure or an operation. And the government produced lots and lots and lots and lots of figures, but a lot of them, I'm afraid, are going in the wrong direction.
So they have a dashboard where they look at the referral to treat statistics. And I'm afraid the waiting lists are rising. Actually, they had reached a low point in March 2026, just after you'll remember the reports of exceptional numbers of removals, but they've now risen 222,000 in the last four months. For those requiring a procedure or an operation, I'm afraid to say the numbers waiting are actually higher than they were at the general election.
For people waiting for more than 12 hours after in A&E, after a decision to admit them from the emergency department. There are more. More waiting, many more waiting this year than there were in 2024. And staff sickness rates, which were mentioned by an honourable member earlier in the debate, are also consistently higher than they were before the general election, so statistics are not going in the right direction across the NHS.
Other ways that the government measure outcomes include financial management of a trust, leadership and government metrics, the number of procedures performed, the number of Never events and CQC inspections. But again, with the CQC, they're planning to fold h seb into the CQC, which so many commentators have guarded against. And I know the Liberal Democrats and US as opposition have guarded against the abolition of H. Seb and I hope that the government, when it takes this through the Lords in Committee in the next week or two, will think again.
They're also planning to roll a number of other things into the CQC at the same time, including events management, and I wonder if they're asking an organisation which the government acknowledge has been struggling to take on too much. So if poor performance is is is identified, who is responsible? Is it the consultant or the matron? Is it the director of sleeves? Is it the chief exec or the chair? If ultimately the trust is underperforming at the moment there are governors that are supposed to hold the board to account.
Well, the health service, the health bill abolishes those, the icbs the commissioners can hold the trust to account, but their budgets have been halved. So will they have the capacity to do so? Many of them have merged. Some of those mergers have been paused by government. This is all a distraction. NHS England has a role, but they are being abolished too, and the head count in DHS and NHS England overall is apparently to be halved.
How will they have the bandwidth in order to be able to provide the scrutiny that the government says it's going to have? Having identified the management of poor performance, the government chose five trusts North Cumbria, Mid and South Essex, Hull University Teaching Hospitals, North Lincolnshire and Goole and East Kent to have special intensive recovery program in March 2026. But it's not clear what has been instituted in these trusts, and it's also not clear what outcomes this is developing or how long this will last and what what the what the government will do for those trusts who fall just outside this group of five, how will they improve variability between trusts that don't fall into the bottom cohort? And how did they choose the five trusts that they've chosen? Because, as we've heard earlier, there are a number of metrics by which some trusts could be considered in the bottom five and that they weren't they weren't chosen.
And some metrics by which those that were chosen may not be in the bottom five. So how has the minister chosen those trusts, and how does she intend to improve those that don't fall into her chosen few? The other thing I wanted to raise was the the workforce. So the government has promised a workforce plan, but workforce is the most important thing. We've heard as much many, many, many honourable members and honourable members today have spoken about the really good staff that they have in their trust, working extremely hard in very difficult conditions, and the government, previous conservative government, had developed a long term workforce plan.
Now this government decided it wanted its own workforce plan and it won the election. It's very much entitled to do so, but it still hasn't written it. It promised it. By the end of 2025, we're rapidly approaching the end of 2026, and it's still not with us. So can the minister.
15:41
15:56
Speaker 20
-
Speaker 20
Thank you, chair. And before the interruption, we were talking about the importance of workforce to the health service and to any improvements that we wish to make into services. The previous conservative government had developed a long term workforce plan, and this government decided to develop its own, which is fair enough, but it's very much delayed. So can the minister tell us, without using the words in due course, imminently or soon, when it's going to be published, preferably giving a date and in return to other plans, the the government said its maternity and neonatal care is its priority, which is good.
But when they came into government, they said they had a plan to improve it. They spent the first 12 months writing their ten year plan, which said it would have a maternity and neonatal plan to be produced. They did that review, which took six months longer than it was supposed to do, taking up now two years of a parliamentary term. And that plan says they're going to have a commissioner that they've yet to appoint.
And another plan, this one called a modern service framework, which will be due apparently by Christmas. So can the minister guarantee that two and a half years into the parliamentary session, they will have a delivery plan for maternity improvements? The bottom line is I'm very concerned the government is too busy reorganising the NHS to deliver on its promises. NHS performance is declining in many areas. There's huge variability between trusts and departments picking five for intensive treatment.
What about the others and how can she clarify that it works? She's internalizing patient experience, which means that it may suddenly look much better. But how will anyone have confidence in the figures if they're produced by the government marking its own homework, the government reorganisation the abolition of NHS England has been badly planned. ICB cuts, mergers and pause mergers are simply a distraction and the removal of the need for governors removes another layer of accountability and scrutiny.
The government say they're working at a pace, but it's a very slow pace. Chair. The workforce plan, the maternity plan have been delayed, but also things like the Hughes report, those people who valporate and mesh, who are suffering are have been waiting and waiting and waiting. It is now well over two years getting towards three years since that report was published. They've waited long enough. I urge the Minister to say, when the government intend to respond to that report.
The the government essentially need to get a grip of the who's holding to account the trusts so that when the health bill comes out the other side of the Lords, it is very. There is a very clear chain of command leading up to the Secretary of State, perhaps, but it's clear that he's not going to be able to micromanage every detail. And there needs to be a clear path so that people know who is accountable, who is going to drive improvement, who to congratulate when improvements are made sure, but also who to hold accountable when it goes wrong.
But when they came into government, they said they had a plan to improve it. They spent the first 12 months writing their ten year plan, which said it would have a maternity and neonatal plan to be produced. They did that review, which took six months longer than it was supposed to do, taking up now two years of a parliamentary term. And that plan says they're going to have a commissioner that they've yet to appoint.
And another plan, this one called a modern service framework, which will be due apparently by Christmas. So can the minister guarantee that two and a half years into the parliamentary session, they will have a delivery plan for maternity improvements? The bottom line is I'm very concerned the government is too busy reorganising the NHS to deliver on its promises. NHS performance is declining in many areas. There's huge variability between trusts and departments picking five for intensive treatment.
What about the others and how can she clarify that it works? She's internalizing patient experience, which means that it may suddenly look much better. But how will anyone have confidence in the figures if they're produced by the government marking its own homework, the government reorganisation the abolition of NHS England has been badly planned. ICB cuts, mergers and pause mergers are simply a distraction and the removal of the need for governors removes another layer of accountability and scrutiny.
The government say they're working at a pace, but it's a very slow pace. Chair. The workforce plan, the maternity plan have been delayed, but also things like the Hughes report, those people who valporate and mesh, who are suffering are have been waiting and waiting and waiting. It is now well over two years getting towards three years since that report was published. They've waited long enough. I urge the Minister to say, when the government intend to respond to that report.
The the government essentially need to get a grip of the who's holding to account the trusts so that when the health bill comes out the other side of the Lords, it is very. There is a very clear chain of command leading up to the Secretary of State, perhaps, but it's clear that he's not going to be able to micromanage every detail. And there needs to be a clear path so that people know who is accountable, who is going to drive improvement, who to congratulate when improvements are made sure, but also who to hold accountable when it goes wrong.
15:59
16:00
16:00
16:00
Speaker 21
-
Speaker 21
very much. I do want to try and get back to most to most colleagues. So it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Stewart, and I do want to thank the member for Chelmsford for bringing forward this debate and the all members who have spoken about the experiences of patients, because this is absolutely about the experience of patients, families and the NHS staff in all our constituencies, because when NHS trust underperforms, however we define it, the effects are very real in that patients wait longer, staff work without the stability and the support they need, and public money is not used as effectively as it should be.
And I do think, and I've made this very clear since becoming a minister, that members of Parliament should be absolutely part of those conversations with those local trusts. And can I particularly commend my friend, the honourable member for Ipswich, for hosting in the way that he has the mental health struggle and seeing that improvement in his constituency as he outlined a mental health absolutely being considered as well as acute services. And indeed, the Liberal Democrat spokesman spoke about her work in supporting her local trust and seeing those improvements.
It can and it does happen, but many of the trusts that we discussed here today have faced problems built up over many years. In fact, some of them I remember from when I was a manager in the health service, Mr. Stewart, over the past 20 years or so, there is rarely one cause or a quick fix. There are variable problems, whether they be workforce shortages, poorest states issues, weak leadership, organisational change and rise in demand, and some of these can reinforce each other.
But let's be very clear for patients and public that are paying attention here today and for all our constituents that this government will not accept poor performance, and we are determined to accelerate the recovery, particularly in the most challenged trusts. Now, if I can just sort of clarify some of the the sort of the rules, everyone knows that NHS England is an arm's length body, and that was a decision taken by my good friends, the Liberal Democrats and the conservatives in opposition a number of years ago.
And the health bill changes that arrangement to bring the NHS together with the Department of Health and Social Care, and that is progressing, as we know, through the House of Lords. It was not opposed in principle by any political party, because we all know that it hasn't worked. And as we bring these two together, it is important to maintain that distinction between running large trusts and running the system as a whole. That operational performance oversight is a skilled job.
It's hard to run a big trust. It requires good clinical and operational managers and leadership and knowledge. But the complete separation of the department from NHS England and from ministers meant that the oversight and what we could see as members of Parliament in our constituency was not linked up to the government and the previous government. So that is one of the things that will improve. And as the honourable lady has just said opposite, of course, ministers will not be micromanaging.
That is a skilled job. The complete separation that removed oversight from local trusts is a dysfunction of the system over the last decade. So in my role, I do meet regularly with the teams, to be very clear and with members of Parliament, and I want to share some of that, how that operational oversight works today. So two major areas I'd highlight. One is the oversight framework that provides what we see a clear and consistent assessment of every NHS organisation.
And it looks at and the honourable lady opposite again in her expertise, recognises that there are many ways to judge performance, but it looks at what matters most to patients. We are very clear in the new oversight framework. It matters most to patients and taxpayers, waiting times, quality of care, use of staff and money and leadership capability in order to have that good quality patient care. You can't separate them, in my view, and I have made sure that it's transparent for the public and for members of Parliament.
That's quite controversial. Some people don't like what they call league tables, but I think it's really important that people can see that. Secondly, the IRP, I'm going to move through some of these at the moment for providers with the most entrenched financial operational leadership, structural challenges that do impact on patient care, because that is what these trusts are about. We are taking now a more holistic approach to that enhanced support for as the honourable lady asked me in her comments, how do we choose? They are the most challenged long term systems.
So the intensive recovery programme is providing for a national level, a short term intensive support for organisations to help strengthen their immediate operational and financial stability, but whilst also developing an organisation owned plan for long term sustainability. Because we can't keep going round in this circle and at the end of the day, these organisations need to be well run, well led and local systems need to own that problem. That is part also of our wider devolution issue.
And I think I did outline that in my letter to the Honourable Lady Chelmsford in September, but I'm very happy to meet again and go through that in more detail, if that's helpful. The first IRP cohort includes Hull University Teaching Hospitals, North Lincolnshire and Goole, East Kent Hospitals, North Cumbria Integrated Care and Mid and South Essex each face very different circumstances, so there is not one size fits all response. And I'm going to touch on for those members that are here that have raised their own issue around that.
Just I know there's an interest in Hull and North Lincolnshire and Goole, and following that independent review, the decision has been taken to dissolve the Humber Health Partnership arrangements and different in how the focus is on strengthening core hospital services, making best use of specialist services, improving productivity and reinforcing the clinical leadership and accountability. And for North Lincolnshire and Goole, the priority is to look at more care into neighborhood and community settings, reflecting the demands in those areas.
And there are good signs of progress with regard to Mid and South Essex, which the Honourable Lady has brought forward and as was highlighted in some interventions, the 2020 merger of those three thrusts has not delivered. What was the planned benefits for 1.2 million people? The staff, culture and morale remains a serious concern with little improvement as was highlighted in those terrible survey results over the past five years. And we've heard those the trust has a long standing performance, problems linked to how demand is managed across the wider health system across that part of Essex, and work is underway to reduce the long waits, improve patient flows, strengthen governance and make better use of the estate.
Analysis has identified and I shared this analysis and productivity patterns with everybody earlier in the year. I'm sure you all looked at them in detail. I'm very happy to go through them again. But the analysis identified more than £122 million of productivity opportunities. It is not simply about saving money. Better organisation across sites and stronger clinical integration should improve patient experience, reduce delays and raise quality for patients. The clinical strategy will make greater use of neighbourhood and community care, in line with our ten year plan and focus on maternity and planned care treatment.
This is backed by £80 million for Southend's hospitals, long standing structural estate problems and support for enabled health centre in Malden. I'll just touch on North Cumbria because the work that's going on in North Cumbria really highlights for members from Westmorland and Lonsdale and from Honiton and sorry I can't read my writing, I can't remember Honiton and Tiverton. Thank you very much. And for. Member for Yeovil about, you know, what can be done and needs to be done in rural healthcare.
But again, if I remind honourable members that hospitals in some of those areas are are funded additionally for tariffs to cope with some of that rurality issues. And again, we highlighted that in our ten year health plan, we absolutely understand across the country different issues with regard Rurality also, just to respond, I won't talk about Kent at the moment because I've not been raised here today, but again, very different issues. But that is why those areas have been chosen, because they are long standing and deeply entrenched problems.
My friend the honourable member for Stoke on Trent South raised the issue around ambulance handover delays and I didn't know she was going to raise this today. But just to assure you, in my oversight meeting yesterday with the team, this was raised with me, the continued problems with the ambulance thing. So those issues are flagged by NHS England in their operational management across the country. They are long standing as she knows, but I just gently disagree with her as she knows about.
She's absolutely right in her assessment of history. But it's not a failure of oversight and accountability. This issue, this is a this is a responsibility of good cooperation, collaboration and management between the services. Locally, the oversight has worked. We know it's a problem. We can see that her constituents can see that. And we very much want them to work together to, to, to resolve that flow that comes through so that the ambulance handover works much better for my honourable friend, the member for Salford.
Again, she highlights, sadly for her constituency, a downward improvement trajectory and she's asked to meet with me. I'm very happy to do with that. Honourable member for Darlington raises and she does a an incredibly difficult job in raising this terrible distress for women in in her constituency. It is, of course, a terrible, terrible case, which she's highlighted that. And I absolutely will make sure that she has a meeting with the minister to absolutely go through how that can be supported and behalf of her constituents, and I know she will work closely to make sure that they are served better.
Now, the early improvements that we are seeing as a result of what's coming through the IRP is working, but we do need to demonstrate progress through safer care, better operational financial performance. We've got clear milestones, credible plans and stronger organisations. That's what we're after. Support nationally is time limited but proportionate because trust ultimately have to stand on their feet. Intensive oversight is not about naming and shaming. Staffing challenge trust, as we've heard, work exceptionally hard and difficult circumstances, and we need to encourage people to go there.
So we need to show them that it can be better. The purpose is to remove barriers to improvement, provide the right expertise and hold boards and NHS leaders to account for the results. So the government will continue to work with NHS England. I am committed to keeping Parliament informed of significant developments. We will judge this approach by its effect on patients and staff, not by the creation of more processes. The oversight framework and the intensive recovery program provide a clear route, in my view, from identifying the risk to taking targeted action, there is much more to do.
It can only be done in local circumstances with the work and cooperation and transparency. That includes working with members of Parliament and where we hear examples of where trust chief executives don't do that. Mr. Stewart, I'm very prepared to call that out. I don't think that is acceptable. There is more to do, but we want practical, safer and more timely care and stronger organisations. I am pleased the opportunity to have this discussion today.
Genuinely, I do think it's important for MPs to be part of this discussion. We want to improve them all. We are focusing on those really long term, sometimes for decades faces. Those people in those areas deserve better and we're determined to make sure they get it.
And I do think, and I've made this very clear since becoming a minister, that members of Parliament should be absolutely part of those conversations with those local trusts. And can I particularly commend my friend, the honourable member for Ipswich, for hosting in the way that he has the mental health struggle and seeing that improvement in his constituency as he outlined a mental health absolutely being considered as well as acute services. And indeed, the Liberal Democrat spokesman spoke about her work in supporting her local trust and seeing those improvements.
It can and it does happen, but many of the trusts that we discussed here today have faced problems built up over many years. In fact, some of them I remember from when I was a manager in the health service, Mr. Stewart, over the past 20 years or so, there is rarely one cause or a quick fix. There are variable problems, whether they be workforce shortages, poorest states issues, weak leadership, organisational change and rise in demand, and some of these can reinforce each other.
But let's be very clear for patients and public that are paying attention here today and for all our constituents that this government will not accept poor performance, and we are determined to accelerate the recovery, particularly in the most challenged trusts. Now, if I can just sort of clarify some of the the sort of the rules, everyone knows that NHS England is an arm's length body, and that was a decision taken by my good friends, the Liberal Democrats and the conservatives in opposition a number of years ago.
And the health bill changes that arrangement to bring the NHS together with the Department of Health and Social Care, and that is progressing, as we know, through the House of Lords. It was not opposed in principle by any political party, because we all know that it hasn't worked. And as we bring these two together, it is important to maintain that distinction between running large trusts and running the system as a whole. That operational performance oversight is a skilled job.
It's hard to run a big trust. It requires good clinical and operational managers and leadership and knowledge. But the complete separation of the department from NHS England and from ministers meant that the oversight and what we could see as members of Parliament in our constituency was not linked up to the government and the previous government. So that is one of the things that will improve. And as the honourable lady has just said opposite, of course, ministers will not be micromanaging.
That is a skilled job. The complete separation that removed oversight from local trusts is a dysfunction of the system over the last decade. So in my role, I do meet regularly with the teams, to be very clear and with members of Parliament, and I want to share some of that, how that operational oversight works today. So two major areas I'd highlight. One is the oversight framework that provides what we see a clear and consistent assessment of every NHS organisation.
And it looks at and the honourable lady opposite again in her expertise, recognises that there are many ways to judge performance, but it looks at what matters most to patients. We are very clear in the new oversight framework. It matters most to patients and taxpayers, waiting times, quality of care, use of staff and money and leadership capability in order to have that good quality patient care. You can't separate them, in my view, and I have made sure that it's transparent for the public and for members of Parliament.
That's quite controversial. Some people don't like what they call league tables, but I think it's really important that people can see that. Secondly, the IRP, I'm going to move through some of these at the moment for providers with the most entrenched financial operational leadership, structural challenges that do impact on patient care, because that is what these trusts are about. We are taking now a more holistic approach to that enhanced support for as the honourable lady asked me in her comments, how do we choose? They are the most challenged long term systems.
So the intensive recovery programme is providing for a national level, a short term intensive support for organisations to help strengthen their immediate operational and financial stability, but whilst also developing an organisation owned plan for long term sustainability. Because we can't keep going round in this circle and at the end of the day, these organisations need to be well run, well led and local systems need to own that problem. That is part also of our wider devolution issue.
And I think I did outline that in my letter to the Honourable Lady Chelmsford in September, but I'm very happy to meet again and go through that in more detail, if that's helpful. The first IRP cohort includes Hull University Teaching Hospitals, North Lincolnshire and Goole, East Kent Hospitals, North Cumbria Integrated Care and Mid and South Essex each face very different circumstances, so there is not one size fits all response. And I'm going to touch on for those members that are here that have raised their own issue around that.
Just I know there's an interest in Hull and North Lincolnshire and Goole, and following that independent review, the decision has been taken to dissolve the Humber Health Partnership arrangements and different in how the focus is on strengthening core hospital services, making best use of specialist services, improving productivity and reinforcing the clinical leadership and accountability. And for North Lincolnshire and Goole, the priority is to look at more care into neighborhood and community settings, reflecting the demands in those areas.
And there are good signs of progress with regard to Mid and South Essex, which the Honourable Lady has brought forward and as was highlighted in some interventions, the 2020 merger of those three thrusts has not delivered. What was the planned benefits for 1.2 million people? The staff, culture and morale remains a serious concern with little improvement as was highlighted in those terrible survey results over the past five years. And we've heard those the trust has a long standing performance, problems linked to how demand is managed across the wider health system across that part of Essex, and work is underway to reduce the long waits, improve patient flows, strengthen governance and make better use of the estate.
Analysis has identified and I shared this analysis and productivity patterns with everybody earlier in the year. I'm sure you all looked at them in detail. I'm very happy to go through them again. But the analysis identified more than £122 million of productivity opportunities. It is not simply about saving money. Better organisation across sites and stronger clinical integration should improve patient experience, reduce delays and raise quality for patients. The clinical strategy will make greater use of neighbourhood and community care, in line with our ten year plan and focus on maternity and planned care treatment.
This is backed by £80 million for Southend's hospitals, long standing structural estate problems and support for enabled health centre in Malden. I'll just touch on North Cumbria because the work that's going on in North Cumbria really highlights for members from Westmorland and Lonsdale and from Honiton and sorry I can't read my writing, I can't remember Honiton and Tiverton. Thank you very much. And for. Member for Yeovil about, you know, what can be done and needs to be done in rural healthcare.
But again, if I remind honourable members that hospitals in some of those areas are are funded additionally for tariffs to cope with some of that rurality issues. And again, we highlighted that in our ten year health plan, we absolutely understand across the country different issues with regard Rurality also, just to respond, I won't talk about Kent at the moment because I've not been raised here today, but again, very different issues. But that is why those areas have been chosen, because they are long standing and deeply entrenched problems.
My friend the honourable member for Stoke on Trent South raised the issue around ambulance handover delays and I didn't know she was going to raise this today. But just to assure you, in my oversight meeting yesterday with the team, this was raised with me, the continued problems with the ambulance thing. So those issues are flagged by NHS England in their operational management across the country. They are long standing as she knows, but I just gently disagree with her as she knows about.
She's absolutely right in her assessment of history. But it's not a failure of oversight and accountability. This issue, this is a this is a responsibility of good cooperation, collaboration and management between the services. Locally, the oversight has worked. We know it's a problem. We can see that her constituents can see that. And we very much want them to work together to, to, to resolve that flow that comes through so that the ambulance handover works much better for my honourable friend, the member for Salford.
Again, she highlights, sadly for her constituency, a downward improvement trajectory and she's asked to meet with me. I'm very happy to do with that. Honourable member for Darlington raises and she does a an incredibly difficult job in raising this terrible distress for women in in her constituency. It is, of course, a terrible, terrible case, which she's highlighted that. And I absolutely will make sure that she has a meeting with the minister to absolutely go through how that can be supported and behalf of her constituents, and I know she will work closely to make sure that they are served better.
Now, the early improvements that we are seeing as a result of what's coming through the IRP is working, but we do need to demonstrate progress through safer care, better operational financial performance. We've got clear milestones, credible plans and stronger organisations. That's what we're after. Support nationally is time limited but proportionate because trust ultimately have to stand on their feet. Intensive oversight is not about naming and shaming. Staffing challenge trust, as we've heard, work exceptionally hard and difficult circumstances, and we need to encourage people to go there.
So we need to show them that it can be better. The purpose is to remove barriers to improvement, provide the right expertise and hold boards and NHS leaders to account for the results. So the government will continue to work with NHS England. I am committed to keeping Parliament informed of significant developments. We will judge this approach by its effect on patients and staff, not by the creation of more processes. The oversight framework and the intensive recovery program provide a clear route, in my view, from identifying the risk to taking targeted action, there is much more to do.
It can only be done in local circumstances with the work and cooperation and transparency. That includes working with members of Parliament and where we hear examples of where trust chief executives don't do that. Mr. Stewart, I'm very prepared to call that out. I don't think that is acceptable. There is more to do, but we want practical, safer and more timely care and stronger organisations. I am pleased the opportunity to have this discussion today.
Genuinely, I do think it's important for MPs to be part of this discussion. We want to improve them all. We are focusing on those really long term, sometimes for decades faces. Those people in those areas deserve better and we're determined to make sure they get it.
16:11
16:11
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Thank you, Mr. Stewart. I'd like to start by thanking all of the honourable members across the House who've taken part in today's really important debate. I'd also like to thank the Minister for her responses that we've heard from across the House issues honourable members pointing out that rural constituencies are not the same as urban constituencies and have very different needs, pointing out that we need investment in our infrastructure at our hospitals. Some of the hospitals are absolutely failing because they have been neglected from a buildings point of view for, frankly, decades, and that needs to be fixed.
None of us are here today to just criticise. All of us are doing this because we want we are listening to our constituents, we're listening to patients, we're listening to staff, and it is our absolute duty to call this out and to demand better. And that's absolutely what we're doing today. You know, I don't like hyperbole. So sometimes when people talk about life and death, I think it is hyperbole. That is not the case here.
It is literally life and death. There are people who are on waiting lists who are there, as we've heard tragically, who have died because they've been too long on a waiting list or because they've been mistreated, misdiagnosed. As we've heard tragically from members across the House. I also just want to make a final plea, just not to concentrate just on the finances. Yes, finances will help with rural issues and they will help with structural and infrastructure issues. They won't help with the cultural issues.
And I just want to finish with one final comment, which is that in the the CQC did a well-led inspection of the Mid and South Essex Trust recently and the, the, the really stark line that came out of it was that staff are afraid to speak up for fear of reprisal. That's a system that isn't about money, that's cultural. And we really need to do something about that. The minister said that we could meet again.
I'd just like to gently say to her, we haven't actually met yet, so I'd love to take her up on the opportunity to meet her for the very first time. So thank you very much for her response, and thank you very much to everybody for taking part today.
None of us are here today to just criticise. All of us are doing this because we want we are listening to our constituents, we're listening to patients, we're listening to staff, and it is our absolute duty to call this out and to demand better. And that's absolutely what we're doing today. You know, I don't like hyperbole. So sometimes when people talk about life and death, I think it is hyperbole. That is not the case here.
It is literally life and death. There are people who are on waiting lists who are there, as we've heard tragically, who have died because they've been too long on a waiting list or because they've been mistreated, misdiagnosed. As we've heard tragically from members across the House. I also just want to make a final plea, just not to concentrate just on the finances. Yes, finances will help with rural issues and they will help with structural and infrastructure issues. They won't help with the cultural issues.
And I just want to finish with one final comment, which is that in the the CQC did a well-led inspection of the Mid and South Essex Trust recently and the, the, the really stark line that came out of it was that staff are afraid to speak up for fear of reprisal. That's a system that isn't about money, that's cultural. And we really need to do something about that. The minister said that we could meet again.
I'd just like to gently say to her, we haven't actually met yet, so I'd love to take her up on the opportunity to meet her for the very first time. So thank you very much for her response, and thank you very much to everybody for taking part today.
16:13
16:13
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
The question is that this House has considered government oversight of under-performing NHS trusts, as many as are of that opinion, say I. Of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. Order, order! Move over. Because the next debate will start at 415. Precisely. Order! I will call Lisa Smart to move the motion. I will then call the minister to respond. I remind other members that they may only make a speech with prior permission, both from the member in charge of the debate and the Minister.
There will not be an opportunity for the member in charge to wind up, as is the convention, for 30 minute debates. Order, order! Lisa Smart to move the motion.
There will not be an opportunity for the member in charge to wind up, as is the convention, for 30 minute debates. Order, order! Lisa Smart to move the motion.
16:15
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
Thank you very much, Mr. Stewart. I beg to move that this House has considered school funding in Stockport, and it really is a pleasure to serve with you in the chair. I must start by declaring an interest. I'm in my 20th year of being an unpaid primary school governor, and I'm currently at fairway, the wonderful Fairway Primary School in Offerton. I'm sure we'd all agree that being an MP is a real privilege, and one of the best things we get to do in this job is to spend time in schools.
Young people get to the nub of issues. They have very, very little filter and they always, always leave me feeling much more positive about the future of our country. But the school visits I've done since being elected to this place have included conversations with headteachers who, while they're doing remarkable things for their pupils and their school communities, they're having to explain which posts they cannot fill, which support they've had to cut and which requests from parents they've had to turn down because the money just isn't there.
The chief executive of the Honeycomb Education Trust, which includes Mellor Primary School in my patch, told me he'd recently been left with three choices lose 3 or 4 members of staff, lose a headteacher or take early retirement himself. He chose retirement and this is what the funding position is doing to experience and celebrated school leaders like Jim in my constituency. Schools across Stockport are expected to provide the same educational experience for students as the rest of the country.
Yet schools in my constituency and across the borough are funded at disproportionately lower levels per pupil compared to other places, including neighbouring Manchester. And that's the case for much of the rest of the country. Now funding for our education system can be complex. Education has two core funding streams education cash limit budget comes through the Council and the Dedicated schools grant, which is the core funding provided by central government through the Department for education for education purposes.
And that budget reaches schools mainly according to the number of pupils that are enrolled with other considerations including deprivation, number of children on free school meals, English as an additional language and low prior attainment taken into account. So the rate attached to each child and the number of children in the school decide almost everything about a school's budget. The primary schools unit of funding in Manchester is £6,404. In neighbouring Stockport it is £5,623.
It does not cost almost £800 more to educate a child in Manchester than it does in Stockport, and it is hard to justify this big gap at secondary schools. The funding in Manchester averages at £8,452 and Stockport receives £7,320, which is a gap of £1,100 for every pupil, and that's £350 less than the national average. We're not just a little bit below the average in Stockport. Among all the authorities in England, Stockport secondary rate is one of the lowest in the country.
Now at the top of the table is the inner London borough, some receiving over £10,000 per pupil. The distance, the distance between the top of that table and for those areas near the bottom. It's hard to defend. Those differences in funding are having a dire effect in Stockport. I've been told that 68 of the 78 schools in Stockport are heading for a deficit, and that the school reserves have fallen from 11 million to around 5 million.
The schools that are attempting to remain financially resilient are joining multi-academy trusts based outside Stockport, and others are being pushed towards mergers. Now, when speaking to Jim from the Honeycomb Education Trust, he laid out the additional burdens that school leaders are facing. In addition to limited funding. These include the removal of the Trust Capacity Fund, National Insurance contributions that were not fully funded, long term staff sickness absence and a growing number of children with special educational needs.
With pleasure.
Young people get to the nub of issues. They have very, very little filter and they always, always leave me feeling much more positive about the future of our country. But the school visits I've done since being elected to this place have included conversations with headteachers who, while they're doing remarkable things for their pupils and their school communities, they're having to explain which posts they cannot fill, which support they've had to cut and which requests from parents they've had to turn down because the money just isn't there.
The chief executive of the Honeycomb Education Trust, which includes Mellor Primary School in my patch, told me he'd recently been left with three choices lose 3 or 4 members of staff, lose a headteacher or take early retirement himself. He chose retirement and this is what the funding position is doing to experience and celebrated school leaders like Jim in my constituency. Schools across Stockport are expected to provide the same educational experience for students as the rest of the country.
Yet schools in my constituency and across the borough are funded at disproportionately lower levels per pupil compared to other places, including neighbouring Manchester. And that's the case for much of the rest of the country. Now funding for our education system can be complex. Education has two core funding streams education cash limit budget comes through the Council and the Dedicated schools grant, which is the core funding provided by central government through the Department for education for education purposes.
And that budget reaches schools mainly according to the number of pupils that are enrolled with other considerations including deprivation, number of children on free school meals, English as an additional language and low prior attainment taken into account. So the rate attached to each child and the number of children in the school decide almost everything about a school's budget. The primary schools unit of funding in Manchester is £6,404. In neighbouring Stockport it is £5,623.
It does not cost almost £800 more to educate a child in Manchester than it does in Stockport, and it is hard to justify this big gap at secondary schools. The funding in Manchester averages at £8,452 and Stockport receives £7,320, which is a gap of £1,100 for every pupil, and that's £350 less than the national average. We're not just a little bit below the average in Stockport. Among all the authorities in England, Stockport secondary rate is one of the lowest in the country.
Now at the top of the table is the inner London borough, some receiving over £10,000 per pupil. The distance, the distance between the top of that table and for those areas near the bottom. It's hard to defend. Those differences in funding are having a dire effect in Stockport. I've been told that 68 of the 78 schools in Stockport are heading for a deficit, and that the school reserves have fallen from 11 million to around 5 million.
The schools that are attempting to remain financially resilient are joining multi-academy trusts based outside Stockport, and others are being pushed towards mergers. Now, when speaking to Jim from the Honeycomb Education Trust, he laid out the additional burdens that school leaders are facing. In addition to limited funding. These include the removal of the Trust Capacity Fund, National Insurance contributions that were not fully funded, long term staff sickness absence and a growing number of children with special educational needs.
With pleasure.
16:19
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Mr. Chairman. Can I commend the Honourable Lady for bringing this forward and particularly the special educational needs? It's a very similar story in Northern Ireland, where there's been historical underfunding. But does the honourable Lady share my concern? Some of the public press, Mr. Chairman, are carrying stories about the numbers of those with ADHD, almost suggesting that the ADHD numbers aren't correct. In my constituency, I can see it very clearly that there are rising numbers of ADHD, and I know I have six grandchildren, of which three of them have have some educational challenges.
That's just an example. Does the honourable lady share my concern that the ADHD figures are rising and they are correct?
That's just an example. Does the honourable lady share my concern that the ADHD figures are rising and they are correct?
16:19
16:19
16:19
16:19
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
For his intervention. I too have family members with ADHD diagnoses. I think we as a society have got much better at understanding neurodiversity, understanding the strengths of those who are neurodiverse, but also how best to educate and work with those who are neurodiverse. And so I agree with him that a better understanding of our fellow citizens has got to be a good thing. And if that comes with a diagnosis, then let's welcome that.
And councils receive a high needs budget to pay for specialist places and for extra support in mainstream schools and in Stockport, that comes to just over £56 million this year, with over 1100 students holding high needs places last year. And that brings me to the deficit on the high needs budget, which hangs over councils across England and which Stockport knows well. By March 2027, the cumulative deficit on Stockport's dedicated schools grant is expected to reach around £68 million.
Now, because of the statutory override, that sum sits in an unusable reserve rather than on the council's balance sheet, where it could be put to better use. The government has said that as part of its wider reforms to special educational needs provision, it will write off 90% of the accrued deficit at March 27th for Stockport. That's an estimated £61 million, so of course I welcome that. It's the right thing to do. And councils have been asking for it for years.
However, the override is due to end in March 2028, with a new funding model due to begin in April 2028. And in between, Stockport expects to build up a further deficit of around £60 million across 26, 27 and 2728. The government has said that more support will be confirmed, but this puts councils and schools in a difficult position as they have to set budgets without knowing whether a sum almost as large as the first write off will be covered.
Schools and councils want to work with a clear understanding of what they should expect. The council and families across the borough deserve better than that uncertainty, and parents of children with special educational needs should be provided with the certainty that, yes, school places will be available to them. And no, you don't have to worry about whether they'll be funded. They should not be told that it depends on a funding model that has yet to be published.
So I'd be really grateful if the minister could update us on when schools should expect publication of the new funding model. Funding disparities can also disproportionately affect students coming from low socio economic backgrounds. As Stockport is one of the most polarised boroughs in the in the country, we have communities that are among the most affluent in the region, and we also have the most deprived ward in the whole of Greater Manchester. Children in that ward start school with disadvantages that an average will never pick up a funding system that sees only the prosperous areas of a borough and sets the rate to match lets down those children.
That's why Stockport is a founder member of the F40 Group, the campaign of the lowest funded local authorities, which has pressed for years for a fairer distribution of education funding and the case has not changed. These gaps mean that, on average, sorry, that an average one form entry primary school in Stockport receives around £164,000 less each year than a same school if it were based in Manchester. Headteachers in my constituency cannot simply absorb a gap like that.
The pressure, though, is not only on budgets in Marple and the surrounding villages. Families living in the catchment area of Marple Hall School are finding that their children are not being offered a place because the school is oversubscribed. And I've heard direct I will happily give way.
And councils receive a high needs budget to pay for specialist places and for extra support in mainstream schools and in Stockport, that comes to just over £56 million this year, with over 1100 students holding high needs places last year. And that brings me to the deficit on the high needs budget, which hangs over councils across England and which Stockport knows well. By March 2027, the cumulative deficit on Stockport's dedicated schools grant is expected to reach around £68 million.
Now, because of the statutory override, that sum sits in an unusable reserve rather than on the council's balance sheet, where it could be put to better use. The government has said that as part of its wider reforms to special educational needs provision, it will write off 90% of the accrued deficit at March 27th for Stockport. That's an estimated £61 million, so of course I welcome that. It's the right thing to do. And councils have been asking for it for years.
However, the override is due to end in March 2028, with a new funding model due to begin in April 2028. And in between, Stockport expects to build up a further deficit of around £60 million across 26, 27 and 2728. The government has said that more support will be confirmed, but this puts councils and schools in a difficult position as they have to set budgets without knowing whether a sum almost as large as the first write off will be covered.
Schools and councils want to work with a clear understanding of what they should expect. The council and families across the borough deserve better than that uncertainty, and parents of children with special educational needs should be provided with the certainty that, yes, school places will be available to them. And no, you don't have to worry about whether they'll be funded. They should not be told that it depends on a funding model that has yet to be published.
So I'd be really grateful if the minister could update us on when schools should expect publication of the new funding model. Funding disparities can also disproportionately affect students coming from low socio economic backgrounds. As Stockport is one of the most polarised boroughs in the in the country, we have communities that are among the most affluent in the region, and we also have the most deprived ward in the whole of Greater Manchester. Children in that ward start school with disadvantages that an average will never pick up a funding system that sees only the prosperous areas of a borough and sets the rate to match lets down those children.
That's why Stockport is a founder member of the F40 Group, the campaign of the lowest funded local authorities, which has pressed for years for a fairer distribution of education funding and the case has not changed. These gaps mean that, on average, sorry, that an average one form entry primary school in Stockport receives around £164,000 less each year than a same school if it were based in Manchester. Headteachers in my constituency cannot simply absorb a gap like that.
The pressure, though, is not only on budgets in Marple and the surrounding villages. Families living in the catchment area of Marple Hall School are finding that their children are not being offered a place because the school is oversubscribed. And I've heard direct I will happily give way.
16:23
16:23
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
Friend for giving way, and she's making a really strong statement for the schools in her patch and in Stockport and wider Stockport. And the point about schools being oversubscribed, this is an issue that's really impacting children as well. Schools such as Woodford Primary School have been oversubscribed for some time. Do you think if we cracked this funding issue, if we made funding fairer, it would help the admissions system a lot better and give parents that rest of mind that they could choose the school that is best for their kid.
16:23
16:23
16:24
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
my constituency neighbour and friend for raising this point. I think there are a number of challenges when it comes to admissions, and I think funding is part of the answer to that. I think when we have multi-academy trusts who are their own admissions authority, working alongside local councils who have the responsibility for finding a place for a child and their wishes and desires don't always align. And I think there's work that I'm doing, and I've been in correspondence with the minister about how we find a way through this.
Because every child deserves a brilliant education at a good local school, and parents should be able to choose the right school for their child. So I strongly agree with him on that, because I've heard directly from parents about the effect that it has on them, that their child is having to get a bus that drives past Marple Hall to get to the school where they've been assigned a place. School funding challenges are also reaching organisations that work alongside our schools.
One of my constituents, David, from Bromley, runs a social enterprise with his wife that delivers educational activities in primary schools. And he came to see me because of the government's decision to end the PE and sports premium. He is now expecting to have to make redundancies among his staff. So I ask the minister if she will look again at how the national funding formula treats areas like Stockport, a system that locks in historic allocations and averages out pockets of real deprivation, does not match funding to need.
And I ask the minister to say whether the department will review the way the formula is built and, if so, to set out a timetable. Would the minister also confirm what support will be available for the deficits that build up in 26, 27 and 2728 before the override ends? Councils really need that certainty now, not in the spring. Can she commit to publishing those figures in good time? I will happily give time.
Give way to my neighbour.
Because every child deserves a brilliant education at a good local school, and parents should be able to choose the right school for their child. So I strongly agree with him on that, because I've heard directly from parents about the effect that it has on them, that their child is having to get a bus that drives past Marple Hall to get to the school where they've been assigned a place. School funding challenges are also reaching organisations that work alongside our schools.
One of my constituents, David, from Bromley, runs a social enterprise with his wife that delivers educational activities in primary schools. And he came to see me because of the government's decision to end the PE and sports premium. He is now expecting to have to make redundancies among his staff. So I ask the minister if she will look again at how the national funding formula treats areas like Stockport, a system that locks in historic allocations and averages out pockets of real deprivation, does not match funding to need.
And I ask the minister to say whether the department will review the way the formula is built and, if so, to set out a timetable. Would the minister also confirm what support will be available for the deficits that build up in 26, 27 and 2728 before the override ends? Councils really need that certainty now, not in the spring. Can she commit to publishing those figures in good time? I will happily give time.
Give way to my neighbour.
16:25
Speaker 24
-
Speaker 24
Mr. Stuart. Can I thank my constituency neighbour for securing this debate? This is a very important issue, and I would go as far as to say that the three of us, although from two different political parties, work well together on issues like this. But would she recognise that the Stockport council has had £2 million in the inclusive mainstream fund allocation under this government? The council has also had another just over 2 million for Experts at Hand programme.
And I wonder if she shares my frustration in terms of Stockport Council only meeting 18% of Ehcp deadlines within 20 weeks by comparison to the English average, which is said to be 50% within 50% of deadlines within that time frame.
And I wonder if she shares my frustration in terms of Stockport Council only meeting 18% of Ehcp deadlines within 20 weeks by comparison to the English average, which is said to be 50% within 50% of deadlines within that time frame.
16:26
16:26
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
Funding coming to our borough is absolutely welcome. He's entirely right, and he's completely right that the three of us, although not always ideologically aligned, work well when it comes to the shared ambitions for our borough. So I strongly agree with him on that. I also agree with him that the. Turnaround and the service that parents and families have been getting in Stockport has not been good enough, and it is something that I know the three of us have raised with the council, and they have a clear aspiration and duty for it to improve, so I strongly agree with him on that.
I'd also agree that some of the funding discrepancies are historic and we need to work now to to fix that. I agree with him strongly on that, because the children who are now going through our education service deserve better. So I agree. And additionally, when will the detail of the new Special Educational Needs funding model due to take effect from April 28th, be published? Will the department consult councils and schools before it's finalised? The children of Stockport, Mr.
Stewart. They are as bright, as hard working and as deserving as any in the country. They should not be funded as though they are worth a little bit less, or indeed £800 less than a child in the neighbouring borough. So I urge the Minister to look again at how we fund our schools, to give councils certainty about special educational needs funding before the override ends, and to give the children of Stockport the fair deal they deserve.
I'd also agree that some of the funding discrepancies are historic and we need to work now to to fix that. I agree with him strongly on that, because the children who are now going through our education service deserve better. So I agree. And additionally, when will the detail of the new Special Educational Needs funding model due to take effect from April 28th, be published? Will the department consult councils and schools before it's finalised? The children of Stockport, Mr.
Stewart. They are as bright, as hard working and as deserving as any in the country. They should not be funded as though they are worth a little bit less, or indeed £800 less than a child in the neighbouring borough. So I urge the Minister to look again at how we fund our schools, to give councils certainty about special educational needs funding before the override ends, and to give the children of Stockport the fair deal they deserve.
16:27
16:28
16:28
Speaker 23
-
Speaker 23
Thank you. It's a pleasure to serve under your Chairship, and I really appreciate the honourable member for Stockport opening this really important debate. Oh, sorry. Yeah. So for, for and and yeah. And I really apologize for giving away your job there. The honourable member, my honourable friends job there. But I would I also wanted to thank the honourable member for her commitment as a school governor for over 20 years.
I think she said, which our school governors do such important, valuable work. And I can I can hear how passionate she is about these issues. And we are to. Investment in education and funding for schools is absolutely critical. It's a huge priority for for this government. As she set out, I thought really powerfully. Teachers do really important work around the country and we want to to back them.
It's why we've prioritised investment in education by making a significant investment in the core schools budget in financial year 2026 to to 2027, with an extra £2.3 billion for schools. This means that the core schools budget will total £67.6 billion, compared to £65.3 billion in 2025 to 2026, and this is a significant investment that shows how important education and schools are to this government. She also mentioned how important it was to to see that wider infrastructure around schools continuing to be funded.
And certainly my experience as a as a council leader for many years working closely with schools, is that, you know, through the cuts we saw to to local services, schools increasingly were picking up those wider pressures, whether that's cuts in, in support for, for young people or for families. And it's why we're investing in all the, the crucial services that sit around schools, whether that's investment in best start in life hubs that that deliver early intervention, investment in experts at hand.
As my honourable friend talked about, which provides much needed speech and language therapists and educational psychologists to be able to support schools investment in family first partnerships, that brings back the early help and early intervention, the that was cut, and also investment in addressing child poverty, whether that is the extension of free school meals or the end to the two child benefit cap. All of this reduces pressure on schools and builds that team back around schools. The honourable member also talked about the importance of supporting children with special educational needs and disabilities, and, and stepping in to, to, to really support teachers.
And that that was one of the main pressure points that they had heard. And that's certainly something that we have that we have very deeply heard how the, the, the extent of those pressures and both on families, young people, but also on educators. And it's why we're taking forward the reforms around special educational needs and disabilities. We have consulted widely on the future model, which which really overhauls the system, creating one that invests a lot earlier brings funding directly into schools so that they are able to, to meet those those needs long term and invest in that early intervention.
And we've started that investment ahead of a full reforms. So we're putting 4 billion into to early intervention, some of which is going directly into schools through the Inclusive Mainstream Fund. Some of it going to councils through experts at hand. And also a significant 3.7 billion capital investment in creating new specialist places. And as she also mentioned, we are supporting local authorities with those historic, of course.
I think she said, which our school governors do such important, valuable work. And I can I can hear how passionate she is about these issues. And we are to. Investment in education and funding for schools is absolutely critical. It's a huge priority for for this government. As she set out, I thought really powerfully. Teachers do really important work around the country and we want to to back them.
It's why we've prioritised investment in education by making a significant investment in the core schools budget in financial year 2026 to to 2027, with an extra £2.3 billion for schools. This means that the core schools budget will total £67.6 billion, compared to £65.3 billion in 2025 to 2026, and this is a significant investment that shows how important education and schools are to this government. She also mentioned how important it was to to see that wider infrastructure around schools continuing to be funded.
And certainly my experience as a as a council leader for many years working closely with schools, is that, you know, through the cuts we saw to to local services, schools increasingly were picking up those wider pressures, whether that's cuts in, in support for, for young people or for families. And it's why we're investing in all the, the crucial services that sit around schools, whether that's investment in best start in life hubs that that deliver early intervention, investment in experts at hand.
As my honourable friend talked about, which provides much needed speech and language therapists and educational psychologists to be able to support schools investment in family first partnerships, that brings back the early help and early intervention, the that was cut, and also investment in addressing child poverty, whether that is the extension of free school meals or the end to the two child benefit cap. All of this reduces pressure on schools and builds that team back around schools. The honourable member also talked about the importance of supporting children with special educational needs and disabilities, and, and stepping in to, to, to really support teachers.
And that that was one of the main pressure points that they had heard. And that's certainly something that we have that we have very deeply heard how the, the, the extent of those pressures and both on families, young people, but also on educators. And it's why we're taking forward the reforms around special educational needs and disabilities. We have consulted widely on the future model, which which really overhauls the system, creating one that invests a lot earlier brings funding directly into schools so that they are able to, to meet those those needs long term and invest in that early intervention.
And we've started that investment ahead of a full reforms. So we're putting 4 billion into to early intervention, some of which is going directly into schools through the Inclusive Mainstream Fund. Some of it going to councils through experts at hand. And also a significant 3.7 billion capital investment in creating new specialist places. And as she also mentioned, we are supporting local authorities with those historic, of course.
16:32
Speaker 24
-
Speaker 24
I thank the Minister for giving that. I appreciate the point she's making about the capital investment. But there isn't a week that goes by where a parent doesn't contact my office in terms of the frustration of the local council not meeting the assessment deadline, and can I encourage the minister and the department to engage with Stockport Council , because 18% is just not good enough. I also think there's a point to be made in terms of parents who come from a low income background, who often just give up, rather than perhaps people of other backgrounds who will continue taking that fight and contact me, contact their local councillors, perhaps pursue legal remedies.
16:32
16:32
Speaker 23
-
Speaker 23
I absolutely agree with my honourable friend that that it it's not acceptable performance. And we are, as a department, determined to hold councils to account on their performance for children with special educational needs and disabilities. For too long that's been on individual parents as he set out. And for some parents, you know, with all the challenges they face, that's incredibly difficult. So we have asked every local authority in the country to develop a send reform plan.
We are monitoring the data within that plan quarterly, the the money that we are supporting local authorities with to to relieve 90% of their deficit as, as the honourable member set out, is contingent on delivery of those send reform plans. And we are we are putting in capacity support 200 million around the country to support that capacity, but also where needed, intervention. And we will be working really closely with with Stockport and I'm very happy to meet with the the the Stockport MPs to discuss that in, in in greater detail and in terms of future years of deficit support, we have said that we will take a similar proportionate response to to supporting
We are monitoring the data within that plan quarterly, the the money that we are supporting local authorities with to to relieve 90% of their deficit as, as the honourable member set out, is contingent on delivery of those send reform plans. And we are we are putting in capacity support 200 million around the country to support that capacity, but also where needed, intervention. And we will be working really closely with with Stockport and I'm very happy to meet with the the the Stockport MPs to discuss that in, in in greater detail and in terms of future years of deficit support, we have said that we will take a similar proportionate response to to supporting
16:33
Speaker 25
-
Speaker 25
Response to to supporting local authorities, but that is absolutely contingent on them being proactive about reforming the system, better, supporting parents and working with the authority. And we've been really clear those expectations and how we will be holding them to, to account for, for delivery. More broadly, the honourable member asked about the distribution of a national funding formula and how it allocates funding, and as she set out, it allocates funding based on pupil numbers and pupil characteristics.
So it means a targeting of funding to schools that have the greatest number of pupils with additional needs. So in 2026 to 27, 11% of the schools national funding formula has been allocated for deprivation factors, 18% has been allocated for additional needs overall, and this corresponds to 5.6 billion for deprivation and 9.2 billion for additional needs. And so there is that focus on on the the wide range of factors around the individual needs of children and young people that that sit within within the formula across the board.
But we are we have committed to keeping both the NFF and the, the high needs funding under review as part of the system changes that we're that we're working on more broadly. And then for for Stockport, as my honourable friend said, there's the extra investment already going in to through the Inclusive Mainstream Fund, the experts at hand and the and the capital investment also putting support into schools to be able to better manage their their budgets and to support some of the collective buying power of schools.
So our new energy for schools service the Supply Teachers and Education Recruitment Framework, a free banking comparison tool. And we're also developing a national procurement framework for management information systems, helping schools to reduce costs and ensure that more funding is directed into provision for children and young people that we absolutely want to to, to ensure is focused on. So we are seeing that greater investment in education, but also in those wider services that support young people.
We want to ensure that that is that that supports early intervention, support schools with the wide range of pressures that that they are facing, and I'm really committed to working alongside members to to make sure that this works in every part of the country. So I'm very happy to take forward that conversation about particular challenges that are facing Stockport.
So it means a targeting of funding to schools that have the greatest number of pupils with additional needs. So in 2026 to 27, 11% of the schools national funding formula has been allocated for deprivation factors, 18% has been allocated for additional needs overall, and this corresponds to 5.6 billion for deprivation and 9.2 billion for additional needs. And so there is that focus on on the the wide range of factors around the individual needs of children and young people that that sit within within the formula across the board.
But we are we have committed to keeping both the NFF and the, the high needs funding under review as part of the system changes that we're that we're working on more broadly. And then for for Stockport, as my honourable friend said, there's the extra investment already going in to through the Inclusive Mainstream Fund, the experts at hand and the and the capital investment also putting support into schools to be able to better manage their their budgets and to support some of the collective buying power of schools.
So our new energy for schools service the Supply Teachers and Education Recruitment Framework, a free banking comparison tool. And we're also developing a national procurement framework for management information systems, helping schools to reduce costs and ensure that more funding is directed into provision for children and young people that we absolutely want to to, to ensure is focused on. So we are seeing that greater investment in education, but also in those wider services that support young people.
We want to ensure that that is that that supports early intervention, support schools with the wide range of pressures that that they are facing, and I'm really committed to working alongside members to to make sure that this works in every part of the country. So I'm very happy to take forward that conversation about particular challenges that are facing Stockport.
16:36
16:45
16:45
16:45
Speaker 26
-
Speaker 26
this House has considered the future of nuclear energy in Scotland. It's a pleasure to serve with you and the chair, Mr. Stewart. And I'm grateful to see so many members who wish to speak on the issue. And I'd also like to take the opportunity to welcome the minister to her first debate here. I grew up in Aberdeen, the home of North Sea oil and gas. I was there while Aberdeen became a cosmopolitan.
City. Workers arrived to work on the rigs from the US and Australia at first, then from all over the UK, and local Scots developed a skills to join the offshore workforce. Our economy boomed, local businesses grew, businesses relocated and new businesses emerged, new housing was built and the price of existing homes skyrocketed as incomes rose, the oil extraction bandwagon arrived and communities thrived. Scotland benefited from the economic boost and Scotland became known as an energy producer.
Now those oil fields are in decline, the reserves are depleted and the oil and gas bandwagon is leaving town, and we must ensure that we don't lose the skilled workforce and we offer them an alternative future in Scotland. We need to move away from fossil fuels to low carbon energy sources because of the climate emergency. But no country has achieved this with renewable electricity alone. Scotland already produces the electricity it needs from renewables, including hydro, onshore and offshore wind, with the balance of demand coming from Torness nuclear power station.
Although this is due to end in 2030, but with a much greater demand for energy across the UK, Scotland could again be known for energy production and the good quality, high paid jobs this brings. Our green transition has been successful, and I welcome this and the continuing economic growth that brings. But the wind doesn't always blow and we import much of the equipment. And we still rely on gas power stations to meet demand and keep the grid stable.
Nuclear offers something different. Rolls-Royce is designing small modular reactors that could be built here by British workers, giving us steady, low carbon power, whatever the weather, and it offers a future for the people who work in oil and gas, making sure they are offered real opportunities outside of oil and gas, and we do not lose them to work abroad. I will.
City. Workers arrived to work on the rigs from the US and Australia at first, then from all over the UK, and local Scots developed a skills to join the offshore workforce. Our economy boomed, local businesses grew, businesses relocated and new businesses emerged, new housing was built and the price of existing homes skyrocketed as incomes rose, the oil extraction bandwagon arrived and communities thrived. Scotland benefited from the economic boost and Scotland became known as an energy producer.
Now those oil fields are in decline, the reserves are depleted and the oil and gas bandwagon is leaving town, and we must ensure that we don't lose the skilled workforce and we offer them an alternative future in Scotland. We need to move away from fossil fuels to low carbon energy sources because of the climate emergency. But no country has achieved this with renewable electricity alone. Scotland already produces the electricity it needs from renewables, including hydro, onshore and offshore wind, with the balance of demand coming from Torness nuclear power station.
Although this is due to end in 2030, but with a much greater demand for energy across the UK, Scotland could again be known for energy production and the good quality, high paid jobs this brings. Our green transition has been successful, and I welcome this and the continuing economic growth that brings. But the wind doesn't always blow and we import much of the equipment. And we still rely on gas power stations to meet demand and keep the grid stable.
Nuclear offers something different. Rolls-Royce is designing small modular reactors that could be built here by British workers, giving us steady, low carbon power, whatever the weather, and it offers a future for the people who work in oil and gas, making sure they are offered real opportunities outside of oil and gas, and we do not lose them to work abroad. I will.
16:47
Speaker 21
-
Speaker 21
Mr. Chairman. Can I commend the Honourable lady? I spoke to her beforehand that this high potential for new nuclear development, the the possibility of some probably 1000 plus jobs and backing from the workers in the trade unions is good, but Northern Ireland has no nuclear modular reactors at all. But there are. There is an opportunity for us perhaps to to have more jobs and attract investment. So does the honourable lady agree that there's a significant opportunity for both Scotland and Northern Ireland, together with energy security becoming increasingly important, this is an unmissable opportunity to both create thousands of skilled jobs and help secure a reliable energy supply, not only for Scotland.
Susan Murray for Northern Ireland.
Susan Murray for Northern Ireland.
16:48
Speaker 26
-
Speaker 26
Thank the honourable member for the intervention and I do agree. I think the important thing is that we identify suitable sites as well as to take it forward. Nuclear power generation offers skilled, well-paid jobs and a long lasting, predictable energy supply. For the first time in history, more than 100,000 people work in the industry across the UK, but sadly not in Scotland. Since 2014, England has gained more than 47,000 nuclear jobs, and Scotland just 661 1 in 10 workers at Hinkley Point C is a Scot forced to travel hundreds of miles each week to work in England.
Compare that with Wales. The will for small nuclear reactor will bring an initial investment of 2.5 billion to sites like Anglesey, and up to 3000 jobs at peak construction, all at one site. And the Welsh Government has signed an agreement with Sizewell C that could that could be worth up to £900 million to its supply chain. The SNP have signed no such agreement, despite the UK government offering to sit down with them and discuss and put opportunities on the table.
I welcome the recent attempt by the Minister to start talks with the Scottish Government to keep the Torness site producing beyond its current scheduled closure in 2030, so I would ask the Minister to ensure that young people in Scotland can access apprenticeships at new sites like Wylfa. I don't believe that young Scots deserve to have their career opportunities limited by the short sighted political games of the SNP. Communities that already host nuclear know its value.
East Lothian Council passed a motion asking the UK government to investigate the possibility of a new power station on the Torness site. The community wants nuclear to remain, but the SNP's position will prevent them, regardless of the community's wishes and how many families could be supported by jobs, how much it could reduce energy bills or how much it would improve UK energy security. The SNP ignored the economic benefits low carbon nuclear power generation could bring to Scotland.
This feels like the previous short sighted approach of the conservatives when they sold off the British National Oil Corporation, then britoil, in 1982. So given the SNP are willing to sacrifice our energy security and the jobs that support nearly 800 families at Torness, can the minister tell me what plans there are to balance the grid when Torness goes offline, how much it's expected to impact electricity prices, and how many of those employed at Torness have been offered alternative employment.
But this is about. I will do.
Compare that with Wales. The will for small nuclear reactor will bring an initial investment of 2.5 billion to sites like Anglesey, and up to 3000 jobs at peak construction, all at one site. And the Welsh Government has signed an agreement with Sizewell C that could that could be worth up to £900 million to its supply chain. The SNP have signed no such agreement, despite the UK government offering to sit down with them and discuss and put opportunities on the table.
I welcome the recent attempt by the Minister to start talks with the Scottish Government to keep the Torness site producing beyond its current scheduled closure in 2030, so I would ask the Minister to ensure that young people in Scotland can access apprenticeships at new sites like Wylfa. I don't believe that young Scots deserve to have their career opportunities limited by the short sighted political games of the SNP. Communities that already host nuclear know its value.
East Lothian Council passed a motion asking the UK government to investigate the possibility of a new power station on the Torness site. The community wants nuclear to remain, but the SNP's position will prevent them, regardless of the community's wishes and how many families could be supported by jobs, how much it could reduce energy bills or how much it would improve UK energy security. The SNP ignored the economic benefits low carbon nuclear power generation could bring to Scotland.
This feels like the previous short sighted approach of the conservatives when they sold off the British National Oil Corporation, then britoil, in 1982. So given the SNP are willing to sacrifice our energy security and the jobs that support nearly 800 families at Torness, can the minister tell me what plans there are to balance the grid when Torness goes offline, how much it's expected to impact electricity prices, and how many of those employed at Torness have been offered alternative employment.
But this is about. I will do.
16:51
Speaker 27
-
Speaker 27
I thank the honourable member for giving way. Current cost estimates for Sizewell C are close to £40 billion, and the necessary nuclear waste facility is currently estimated by the government itself to cost up to £60 billion, and described by one of the government's own departments as unachievable. Independent experts are suggesting that costs could be closer to £70 billion for the waste facility alone. Is it not unacceptable to pile those eye watering costs on to bill payers? And should we not instead be investing in cheaper and cleaner energy in energy technologies like deep geothermal and tidal stream, which could deliver baseload?
16:52
16:52
Speaker 26
-
Speaker 26
Thank you to the honourable member for his intervention. I do believe that we should include other energy sources in the baseload. However, the strike price of. The strike price of wind has been lower than nuclear. However, it is important that there is a geographically predictable source of energy for the grid and that helps to reduce transmission costs. So while the investment is going to be significant, it is likely to be less than the government, than the minister, than the sorry, the honourable member has mentioned, but it is producing a stable, reliable source of energy which in time will bring down household bills.
But this is about more than jobs within the nuclear industry. Nuclear can strengthen the UK's energy security and give heavy industry. From steel to ceramics and new tech companies the steady supply of power that they need to grow. And I will.
But this is about more than jobs within the nuclear industry. Nuclear can strengthen the UK's energy security and give heavy industry. From steel to ceramics and new tech companies the steady supply of power that they need to grow. And I will.
16:53
Speaker 28
-
Speaker 28
Do. She. Given that she criticised the other parties, which I agree with her criticisms of. Does she look, with any regret her own party's position in 2010, when they opposed nuclear on the basis that it would come on stream until 2022? And does she think if they had taken a different position, then we might be paying lower bills just now?
16:53
16:53
Speaker 26
-
Speaker 26
Thank you to the honourable member for your intervention. I wasn't. Apologize. I wasn't around in 2010, and I always take situations as they are and looking to the future. So I think what we have to do is take steps now and , and work on where we are now and not regret what has happened in the past. So a stable, reliable power supply will bring down transmission costs and household bills, citing new small modular reactors at Hunterston and Dounreay could also breathe life back into the Highlands and Islands, just as oil and gas once did for the north east, where remote rural communities are losing their young people and nuclear site brings the jobs and investments that gives them a reason to stay.
We have seen what happens when a country turns its back on nuclear. Germany took an approach must. Much like the SNP of decommissioning and deindustrialisation, and has gone from exporting 60W, 26 terawatt hours of electricity a year to importing 22 terawatt hours and relying on coal powered plants. Now more than ever, we have a responsibility to protect our environment. Personally, I would rather follow the lead of France. Rather than shying away from nuclear, they chose to invest in a low carbon energy supply and it has paid off.
French households pay around a quarter less for their electricity than households in the UK, and the communities that host nuclear plants have seen the benefits directly in childcare, transport, hospital upgrades and affordable housing. Scotland could see the same well-paid jobs, new housing, new housebuilding, increased tax revenue and real community benefit, giving people a future and good, well-paid, secure jobs. But the SNP say no. At a time when Scotland faces chronic housing shortage, when bus services have been cut by six in just five years, when Scots pay some of the highest electricity prices in Europe and remote and rural areas pay exorbitant energy charges, the SNP refused to even consider such a clear solution, particularly when it.
We have seen what happens when a country turns its back on nuclear. Germany took an approach must. Much like the SNP of decommissioning and deindustrialisation, and has gone from exporting 60W, 26 terawatt hours of electricity a year to importing 22 terawatt hours and relying on coal powered plants. Now more than ever, we have a responsibility to protect our environment. Personally, I would rather follow the lead of France. Rather than shying away from nuclear, they chose to invest in a low carbon energy supply and it has paid off.
French households pay around a quarter less for their electricity than households in the UK, and the communities that host nuclear plants have seen the benefits directly in childcare, transport, hospital upgrades and affordable housing. Scotland could see the same well-paid jobs, new housing, new housebuilding, increased tax revenue and real community benefit, giving people a future and good, well-paid, secure jobs. But the SNP say no. At a time when Scotland faces chronic housing shortage, when bus services have been cut by six in just five years, when Scots pay some of the highest electricity prices in Europe and remote and rural areas pay exorbitant energy charges, the SNP refused to even consider such a clear solution, particularly when it.
16:56
Speaker 29
-
Speaker 29
For listing the many failures of the SNP government over its time in Holyrood. I wonder if she might think about why, once they decided not to invest in new nuclear, why they didn't take steps to make additional storage or other energy solutions available. We haven't had a pumped hydro storage solution in Scotland since 1965. Does she think at all about the other failures the SNP have had in trying to have a sensible energy policy?
16:56
16:56
Speaker 26
-
Speaker 26
Thank you to the honourable member for the intervention and I. Today we are considering the situation for nuclear. But I do accept. I know that there is new pumped hydro storage coming online from Loch Sloy and there are other projects in the pipeline. So. But absolutely. And yeah, but today we're just really talking about the nuclear position. Where the SNP refused to even consider the nuclear solution, even when it's funded by Westminster.
When I speak to my constituents in Dunbartonshire about energy, their position is clear. They want to tackle climate change. They want government to look after environment and they want the government to deliver net zero and they want cheaper bills. I want the same, and I believe so do most people living in Scotland and across the UK. And there is a clear solution small modular reactors producing a predictable, low carbon, cheap energy system.
The waste product of nuclear fission is a concern, but nuclear is the only form of energy that prices in decommissioning and waste disposal. At the start of the project. Scotland deserves better than student politics and political games of the SNP, but I support the stance of Minister Shanks not to impose unwanted nuclear infrastructure to Scotland. Scottish communities. The Scottish Parliament should decide, and I am pleased that we now have ten more Liberal Democrat or ten Liberal Democrat MSPs in Holyrood to influence the debate going forward.
I will.
When I speak to my constituents in Dunbartonshire about energy, their position is clear. They want to tackle climate change. They want government to look after environment and they want the government to deliver net zero and they want cheaper bills. I want the same, and I believe so do most people living in Scotland and across the UK. And there is a clear solution small modular reactors producing a predictable, low carbon, cheap energy system.
The waste product of nuclear fission is a concern, but nuclear is the only form of energy that prices in decommissioning and waste disposal. At the start of the project. Scotland deserves better than student politics and political games of the SNP, but I support the stance of Minister Shanks not to impose unwanted nuclear infrastructure to Scotland. Scottish communities. The Scottish Parliament should decide, and I am pleased that we now have ten more Liberal Democrat or ten Liberal Democrat MSPs in Holyrood to influence the debate going forward.
I will.
16:58
16:58
Speaker 26
-
Speaker 26
Thanks to the honourable member for his intervention. I do agree that on most issues, it's for the local authorities and the planning authorities to make the decisions. But for national infrastructure in Scotland, then there is a place for the for Holyrood to be involved. Plans announced by the Shadow Secretary, by the Shadow Energy Security Secretary to override devolved planning laws, should be roundly rejected. Nuclear offers Scotland thousands of jobs, millions in tax revenue, billions in investment and an opportunity to revive the communities of remote and rural Scotland that have been left behind far too often.
I am proud to be Scottish with our own education system, health system and legal system to protect our Scottish identity. Scotland could once again be a leading energy exporter in a way that protects our environment, grows remote and rural communities by providing housing and jobs, helping to pay for improved connectivity and saving the Gaelic language. Scotland has always worked closely with the rest of the with the rest of the UK with people and products connected and mobile.
Nuclear power can continue this tradition by providing low carbon energy to contribute to our evolving sustainable energy system to reduce household bills and supply industry. And with that in mind, I have one final ask of the Minister to build on their assessment of Scotland's nuclear power plant potential sites by setting out, by the end of this parliamentary term, the jobs and economic benefit that new nuclear could bring to Scotland. That way we can see in real terms the cost of the SNP's approach to nuclear.
Thank you.
I am proud to be Scottish with our own education system, health system and legal system to protect our Scottish identity. Scotland could once again be a leading energy exporter in a way that protects our environment, grows remote and rural communities by providing housing and jobs, helping to pay for improved connectivity and saving the Gaelic language. Scotland has always worked closely with the rest of the with the rest of the UK with people and products connected and mobile.
Nuclear power can continue this tradition by providing low carbon energy to contribute to our evolving sustainable energy system to reduce household bills and supply industry. And with that in mind, I have one final ask of the Minister to build on their assessment of Scotland's nuclear power plant potential sites by setting out, by the end of this parliamentary term, the jobs and economic benefit that new nuclear could bring to Scotland. That way we can see in real terms the cost of the SNP's approach to nuclear.
Thank you.
17:00
17:01
Speaker 28
-
Speaker 28
Thank you, Mr. Stewart, and it's a pleasure to serve under your chairpersonship. And I thank my namesake, the member for Dunbartonshire, West Dunbartonshire. Forgive me. Forgive me for securing this very important debate about an issue of huge concern and importance to all of our constituents. I am an MP for Edinburgh and East Lothian, one of two MPs for the county, which is home to Torness nuclear power station, Scotland's only remaining nuclear power station .
With 40 years of local expertise. Torness is scheduled to close in 2030 despite powering £2 million, 2 million homes and employing 500 workers, and the SNP's arbitrary ban on nuclear in Scotland means nothing will replace it. Labour led East Lothian Council, the GMB workers, residents and myself all back new nuclear at torness. As the local MP, I support it because it will bring jobs, because it will protect the environment and because it will lower bills.
Everybody backs new nuclear at torness except the SNP. I cannot understand. Yes, I will give way happily.
With 40 years of local expertise. Torness is scheduled to close in 2030 despite powering £2 million, 2 million homes and employing 500 workers, and the SNP's arbitrary ban on nuclear in Scotland means nothing will replace it. Labour led East Lothian Council, the GMB workers, residents and myself all back new nuclear at torness. As the local MP, I support it because it will bring jobs, because it will protect the environment and because it will lower bills.
Everybody backs new nuclear at torness except the SNP. I cannot understand. Yes, I will give way happily.
17:02
Speaker 27
-
Speaker 27
Thank you for giving me. The honourable member suggests that it would cut bills, but it manifestly is not cutting bills for the nuclear power stations that are being built at the moment. New nuclear power stations being built will also add to bills and a nuclear waste facility, which could cost as much as £70 billion. Nobody has actually described how that is going to happen, even though it needs to happen and how that will be paid for, but it will probably go into bill payers.
How is that going to reduce bills for anybody in any kind of reasonable timescale?
How is that going to reduce bills for anybody in any kind of reasonable timescale?
17:02
Speaker 28
-
Speaker 28
I profoundly reject everything the honourable member has just said there. One need only look at France. One need only look at France, where 15 or so years ago they pursued a policy of nuclear. They are. Domestic bills are a quarter lower. Their industrial bills are half what they are in Scotland. One could. The minute that we could have the policy. Security that the SNP have blocked for the past 20 years in Scotland, we would be able to crowd in private investment that nuclear would have.
As it is, nuclear expertise. Nuclear investment is going south into England and not coming to Scotland thanks to his party's decisions. And not only that, I cannot understand how the SNP can support drilling in the North Sea for oil and gas, yet not support nuclear. In East Lothian, the ban on nuclear is possibly the most baleful, pernicious and counter-productive of all of the SNP's policies. As someone who cares passionately about climate change, it boggles my mind that after the hottest summer on record in which oil and gas companies have posted record profits, SNP policy is to oppose nuclear power stations and support a tax cut for oil and gas companies.
Anybody who supports renewables, who wants to see a just transition from fossil fuels to renewables must support nuclear. We need the energy resources. When the sun does not shine and the wind doesn't blow. The right question is not. The right question. We must ask is what is that alternative? Either nuclear or it is oil and gas. I say nuclear. The SNP support further fossil fuels and nobody is arguing that nuclear is risk free.
But the risks of nuclear are far lower one than they ever were, and two than those of fossil fuels, which are literally boiling the planet. We are on. The risk from fossil fuels is attenuated, but it is higher than it is with with nuclear. And the final point would be we must look internationally. Germany, after shutting down its nuclear power stations, now burns more coal than any European country.
Arguably the party that has done the most to increase carbon emissions in Europe is the German Green Party. When they push that country off nuclear. Compare that to France, where, as I have said, they are 70% nuclear to their grid. Industrial bills are half of Scotland and domestic bills are a quarter. We know that. If you want to gain support for the just transition, you need to get lower bills.
Every party in the House of Commons now supports nuclear energy. Even the Greens, even the Liberal Democrats. There's more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents. Only the SNP are the blockers. So my question for the government is this what can we possibly do to persuade the SNP to stop blocking nuclear and allow it to lower bills and create a just transition to protect the environment.
Here, here,
As it is, nuclear expertise. Nuclear investment is going south into England and not coming to Scotland thanks to his party's decisions. And not only that, I cannot understand how the SNP can support drilling in the North Sea for oil and gas, yet not support nuclear. In East Lothian, the ban on nuclear is possibly the most baleful, pernicious and counter-productive of all of the SNP's policies. As someone who cares passionately about climate change, it boggles my mind that after the hottest summer on record in which oil and gas companies have posted record profits, SNP policy is to oppose nuclear power stations and support a tax cut for oil and gas companies.
Anybody who supports renewables, who wants to see a just transition from fossil fuels to renewables must support nuclear. We need the energy resources. When the sun does not shine and the wind doesn't blow. The right question is not. The right question. We must ask is what is that alternative? Either nuclear or it is oil and gas. I say nuclear. The SNP support further fossil fuels and nobody is arguing that nuclear is risk free.
But the risks of nuclear are far lower one than they ever were, and two than those of fossil fuels, which are literally boiling the planet. We are on. The risk from fossil fuels is attenuated, but it is higher than it is with with nuclear. And the final point would be we must look internationally. Germany, after shutting down its nuclear power stations, now burns more coal than any European country.
Arguably the party that has done the most to increase carbon emissions in Europe is the German Green Party. When they push that country off nuclear. Compare that to France, where, as I have said, they are 70% nuclear to their grid. Industrial bills are half of Scotland and domestic bills are a quarter. We know that. If you want to gain support for the just transition, you need to get lower bills.
Every party in the House of Commons now supports nuclear energy. Even the Greens, even the Liberal Democrats. There's more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents. Only the SNP are the blockers. So my question for the government is this what can we possibly do to persuade the SNP to stop blocking nuclear and allow it to lower bills and create a just transition to protect the environment.
Here, here,
17:06
17:06
17:06
Speaker 31
-
Speaker 31
Thank you, Mr. Stewart. A great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I commend the honourable lady on securing this debate, and I very much welcome the Minister to her place, the Magnox reactor at Chapelcross, near Annan, provided highly skilled employment for five decades, supported families, sustained communities and help power the country. Like many people living locally, I am deeply frustrated that the possibility of a new nuclear plant on that site has been all but ruled out by dogmatic SNP policy dogma, which runs counter to the conclusions of the IPCC.
The I, the EU's Joint Research Centre and the O, c d amongst others. Mr. Stewart, you will recall that when we first joined this Parliament in 2005, nuclear was perceived as a declining industry, but as co-chair of the all party Group on Nuclear energy, I have seen first hand the renaissance that the industry is going through, but sadly only in England and Wales, where billions of pounds are being invested, new technologies are being developed, supply chains are growing, thousands of skilled jobs are being created.
Yet Scotland, once at the forefront of the nuclear generation, is being left behind. That is the only conclusion that any reasonable person can reach when they look at the facts. And the honourable lady set out the numbers, but I think they are worth repeating. Since 2014, England has added more than 47,000 civil nuclear jobs. Scotland has added just 661. Scotland has missed out on almost 5000 jobs, while many highly skilled Scots have little choice but to travel south to work on projects that could just as easily be taking place at home.
And many people from the Annan area, for example, daily travel to west Cumbria when they would much rather be working closer to home. While Scotland misses out on jobs, investment and opportunities. What do the. What do communities like mine here from the Scottish Government? The answer always seems to be more of the same more pylons, more wind turbines, more solar panels, more substations, more battery storage and more expensive energy, none of which bring substantive employment to the communities actually impacted.
But when it comes to skilled jobs, apprenticeships and long term investment, the nuclear can bring, the answer from the SNP is an unequivocal no. Dumfries and Galloway Council, like East Lothian Council and others, have called on the Scottish Government to take a fresh look at nuclear because they recognise the opportunities it could bring to their communities. The irony is that Scotland has some of the best potential nuclear sites anywhere in the United Kingdom.
A recent technical assessment by Great British Energy Nuclear concluded that sites including Torness, Hunterston and Dounreay all have high potential for future nuclear development. If the Scottish Government were willing to reconsider its position and Chapelcross would be ideal for a small modular reactor, and I very much continue to campaign for that to happen in my constituency. But what is the alternative, Mr. Stewart? A grid that is becoming increasingly expensive and volatile.
Scotland now spends £1.5 billion a year balancing the electricity system, five times what it spent before Hunterston B retired. The communities I represent know the country needs reliable power. They also want good, stable jobs and they understand and they have seen for over five decades that that comes with a nuclear power station.
The I, the EU's Joint Research Centre and the O, c d amongst others. Mr. Stewart, you will recall that when we first joined this Parliament in 2005, nuclear was perceived as a declining industry, but as co-chair of the all party Group on Nuclear energy, I have seen first hand the renaissance that the industry is going through, but sadly only in England and Wales, where billions of pounds are being invested, new technologies are being developed, supply chains are growing, thousands of skilled jobs are being created.
Yet Scotland, once at the forefront of the nuclear generation, is being left behind. That is the only conclusion that any reasonable person can reach when they look at the facts. And the honourable lady set out the numbers, but I think they are worth repeating. Since 2014, England has added more than 47,000 civil nuclear jobs. Scotland has added just 661. Scotland has missed out on almost 5000 jobs, while many highly skilled Scots have little choice but to travel south to work on projects that could just as easily be taking place at home.
And many people from the Annan area, for example, daily travel to west Cumbria when they would much rather be working closer to home. While Scotland misses out on jobs, investment and opportunities. What do the. What do communities like mine here from the Scottish Government? The answer always seems to be more of the same more pylons, more wind turbines, more solar panels, more substations, more battery storage and more expensive energy, none of which bring substantive employment to the communities actually impacted.
But when it comes to skilled jobs, apprenticeships and long term investment, the nuclear can bring, the answer from the SNP is an unequivocal no. Dumfries and Galloway Council, like East Lothian Council and others, have called on the Scottish Government to take a fresh look at nuclear because they recognise the opportunities it could bring to their communities. The irony is that Scotland has some of the best potential nuclear sites anywhere in the United Kingdom.
A recent technical assessment by Great British Energy Nuclear concluded that sites including Torness, Hunterston and Dounreay all have high potential for future nuclear development. If the Scottish Government were willing to reconsider its position and Chapelcross would be ideal for a small modular reactor, and I very much continue to campaign for that to happen in my constituency. But what is the alternative, Mr. Stewart? A grid that is becoming increasingly expensive and volatile.
Scotland now spends £1.5 billion a year balancing the electricity system, five times what it spent before Hunterston B retired. The communities I represent know the country needs reliable power. They also want good, stable jobs and they understand and they have seen for over five decades that that comes with a nuclear power station.
17:10
Speaker 32
-
Speaker 32
Good afternoon, Mr. Stewart. It's a pleasure to have you in the chair. As always, my thanks to the honourable member for Dunbartonshire for bringing this important debate to Westminster Hall, and from the outset, I'll notify members to my membership of CND. And with that, I am most definitely ideologically opposed to nuclear. But it does irritate me, though, when that phrase is used as some sort of insult or indulging in student politics.
Now, let me explain some of the reasons why I'm opposed. It is utterly ludicrous to suggest that nuclear is a green energy source. I mean, how can it be when it produces radioactive waste with long term toxicity that's hazardous for thousands of years? And nuclear is certainly not a low carbon source either. The powerful and wealthy pro-nuclear lobby, which we are very familiar with in this place, ignore the large carbon emissions arising from the uranium fuel cycle and, of course, from nuclear waste disposal.
It is proven that nuclear power generation produces up to 20 times more CO2 per megawatt hour than renewable sources, and the construction of nuclear stations themselves release enormous quantities of CO2. So compared to renewables, nuclear power is definitely not a low carbon source. And what about the astronomical construction costs? Hinkley point C initially was estimated at £18 billion. Now that has increased several times over the years. Now EDF say the cost is £32 billion and rising because of inflation.
So clearly nuclear construction costs are massively higher than those for renewable energy. The bottom line is, Mr. Stewart, that nuclear is just not value for money. So why does anyone think Scotland having more nuclear sites would be any different? The on going Hinkley saga also proves that it takes ages to build nuclear sites. On average, it takes nearly two decades to plan and build a nuclear reactor, so new nuclear power is not coming any time soon.
Nuclear is no quick fix or solution for families struggling with energy bills in this cost of living crisis. Not now and not for many years to come. Mr. Stewart.
Now, let me explain some of the reasons why I'm opposed. It is utterly ludicrous to suggest that nuclear is a green energy source. I mean, how can it be when it produces radioactive waste with long term toxicity that's hazardous for thousands of years? And nuclear is certainly not a low carbon source either. The powerful and wealthy pro-nuclear lobby, which we are very familiar with in this place, ignore the large carbon emissions arising from the uranium fuel cycle and, of course, from nuclear waste disposal.
It is proven that nuclear power generation produces up to 20 times more CO2 per megawatt hour than renewable sources, and the construction of nuclear stations themselves release enormous quantities of CO2. So compared to renewables, nuclear power is definitely not a low carbon source. And what about the astronomical construction costs? Hinkley point C initially was estimated at £18 billion. Now that has increased several times over the years. Now EDF say the cost is £32 billion and rising because of inflation.
So clearly nuclear construction costs are massively higher than those for renewable energy. The bottom line is, Mr. Stewart, that nuclear is just not value for money. So why does anyone think Scotland having more nuclear sites would be any different? The on going Hinkley saga also proves that it takes ages to build nuclear sites. On average, it takes nearly two decades to plan and build a nuclear reactor, so new nuclear power is not coming any time soon.
Nuclear is no quick fix or solution for families struggling with energy bills in this cost of living crisis. Not now and not for many years to come. Mr. Stewart.
17:12
17:12
17:12
Speaker 27
-
Speaker 27
Just to emphasize a point that I made earlier on, that there are other alternatives here. We could be investing in things like geothermal. Deep geothermal can generate huge amounts of heat and therefore steam and power and power turbine generation of electricity. It can be done for a fraction of the price. It can be built on a fraction of the time, and it's clean and leaves no waste. Legacy in the same way that nuclear does.
Does the honourable member agree that that would be a useful way forward?
Does the honourable member agree that that would be a useful way forward?
17:13
Speaker 32
-
Speaker 32
Thank you very much, the honourable member. Now, I agree that we do need an energy mix. And yes, of course, in testing circumstances we face right now, we should be looking at exploring, having a wide variety and assortment of different energies but non-nuclear. Mr. Stewart, there has been no real technological advancements or fundamentally new designs for nuclear reactors or processes this century. Large reactors are the same generation three plus designs of the past 25 years.
Even the nuclear industry admit that reactor construction and design are cheaper for companies when it is done on a bigger, not a smaller scale. So the idea that lots of small reactors dotted around the country is going to be more affordable or safer, or the answer to lower energy costs is pure fantasy. And finally, politicians say that the UK will likely be at war with Russia by 2030. And if these war hawks are correct, then big nuclear power stations or hundreds of small reactor sites up and down the country would surely make communities a target.
Other truly green, more affordable and definitely safer. Energy sources are out there. Renewable energy sources are largely an untapped market. That is, an industry that the government could create, could shape and control for the benefit of our people. So to finish ahead of time as well, I make no apologies for thinking that that is a far better ideology than having toxic radioactive waste.
Even the nuclear industry admit that reactor construction and design are cheaper for companies when it is done on a bigger, not a smaller scale. So the idea that lots of small reactors dotted around the country is going to be more affordable or safer, or the answer to lower energy costs is pure fantasy. And finally, politicians say that the UK will likely be at war with Russia by 2030. And if these war hawks are correct, then big nuclear power stations or hundreds of small reactor sites up and down the country would surely make communities a target.
Other truly green, more affordable and definitely safer. Energy sources are out there. Renewable energy sources are largely an untapped market. That is, an industry that the government could create, could shape and control for the benefit of our people. So to finish ahead of time as well, I make no apologies for thinking that that is a far better ideology than having toxic radioactive waste.
17:14
Speaker 33
-
Speaker 33
I would like to thank the honourable member for Dunbartonshire for securing and introducing this important debate. So in my constituency of North Ayrshire and Arran over the years, the nuclear power stations at Hunterston provided well-paid, skilled jobs and contributed greatly to the local economy. Hunterston, a operated from 1964 to 1990 and Hunterston B, operated from 1976 to 2022, with both contributing greatly to the UK grid. This year, Hunterston B became the first advanced gas cooled reactor to be relicensed for decommissioning, and even now, during the decommissioning process, there are skilled and unionised jobs.
These are not in the same numbers as before, but they are still highly skilled jobs that make a huge difference to the constituency and the local economy. Sadly for us, if we have heard today in Scotland a no nuclear policy stance, we could have so much more with a change in policy. For example, Denmark is currently reviewing its 1985 ban on nuclear power and considering making small modular reactors a part of its clean energy grid.
So why won't the Scottish Government do the same? Scotland has the most expensive grid, as we have heard in the whole of the UK, and spends £1.5 billion on balancing every year. This is five times more than what it spent before Hunterston B was retired. Small modular reactors are advanced nuclear reactors that produce up to 300MW per unit, which is about one third of the generating capacity of traditional nuclear reactors. SMRs have many advantages that are linked to their design.
They are physically smaller than conventional stations, they have a smaller footprint and they can be prefabricated and installed on site. Yet, as we have heard, the SNP government still refuse to move on their stance towards nuclear power despite being the only party in the House of Commons with a blanket stance against nuclear. I was interested to read that 90% of the world's economy support expanding nuclear capacity as part of the clean energy strategy, the SNP are lagging behind the future of energy security both in the UK and worldwide.
Scotland has lost out on nearly 5000 jobs in the nuclear industry, and many Scottish nuclear industry workers, as we have heard, are forced to leave Scotland to go and work in England or Wales at other nuclear sites. It is really quite depressing to think of how much talent and skill Scotland is using. Is choosing to lose to other parts of the UK. In my constituency of North Ayrshire and Arran, an investment in new nuclear would make a great difference, bringing new, highly skilled jobs to the constituency and and and beyond, and offering the badly needed apprenticeships for local young people.
The Hunterston site has so much potential and Scotland is really missing out on a great opportunity for good jobs thanks to backward SNP decisions.
These are not in the same numbers as before, but they are still highly skilled jobs that make a huge difference to the constituency and the local economy. Sadly for us, if we have heard today in Scotland a no nuclear policy stance, we could have so much more with a change in policy. For example, Denmark is currently reviewing its 1985 ban on nuclear power and considering making small modular reactors a part of its clean energy grid.
So why won't the Scottish Government do the same? Scotland has the most expensive grid, as we have heard in the whole of the UK, and spends £1.5 billion on balancing every year. This is five times more than what it spent before Hunterston B was retired. Small modular reactors are advanced nuclear reactors that produce up to 300MW per unit, which is about one third of the generating capacity of traditional nuclear reactors. SMRs have many advantages that are linked to their design.
They are physically smaller than conventional stations, they have a smaller footprint and they can be prefabricated and installed on site. Yet, as we have heard, the SNP government still refuse to move on their stance towards nuclear power despite being the only party in the House of Commons with a blanket stance against nuclear. I was interested to read that 90% of the world's economy support expanding nuclear capacity as part of the clean energy strategy, the SNP are lagging behind the future of energy security both in the UK and worldwide.
Scotland has lost out on nearly 5000 jobs in the nuclear industry, and many Scottish nuclear industry workers, as we have heard, are forced to leave Scotland to go and work in England or Wales at other nuclear sites. It is really quite depressing to think of how much talent and skill Scotland is using. Is choosing to lose to other parts of the UK. In my constituency of North Ayrshire and Arran, an investment in new nuclear would make a great difference, bringing new, highly skilled jobs to the constituency and and and beyond, and offering the badly needed apprenticeships for local young people.
The Hunterston site has so much potential and Scotland is really missing out on a great opportunity for good jobs thanks to backward SNP decisions.
17:17
17:17
17:18
17:18
Speaker 34
-
Speaker 34
Thank you. So I wish to congratulate the honourable member for Dunbartonshire for securing this important debate. Scotland has a proud heritage and skilled workers, vast renewable resources and the North Sea. But to make the most of those strengths, we need an energy policy that is ambitious, practical and focused on the future. I mean, can we really believe that Hunterston B has now ended generation with no future plan to build the next generation of new nuclear.
For almost 46 years, that nuclear power station provided reliable, low carbon electricity to Scotland. At its peak, Hunterston B generated enough electricity to power almost 2 million homes a year. Over its lifetime, it produced just under 300 terawatt hours of electricity, enough to power every home in Scotland for more than 30 years while avoiding more than 100 million tonnes of carbon emissions. It supported around 500 jobs, 250 contractors and made a major contribution to Ayrshire's economy.
That is a remarkable legacy and so is the legacy of tenderness, which is now Scotland's most productive clean power asset in Scotland's history. Since coming online in 1988, that generated more than 300 terawatts of. Hours, hours of electricity and that is enough power for every home in Scotland for around 36 years. And it also helped to avoid more than 100 million tonnes of CO2 emissions. These are not just statistics. They demonstrate what nuclear power has delivered for Scotland and continued and can continue to do so.
And yet Scotland has no new nuclear power station under construction and no future plan in that matters, because nuclear and renewables should not be presented as alternatives. Scotland needs both. Wind power is one of our greatest strengths, but wind does not blow every hour of every day. Nuclear provides dependable, low carbon electricity alongside renewables, renewables and for families and businesses. In my constituency in Kilmarnock and right across Scotland, energy security matters. We have all seen how the global events can send our energy prices soaring more, more, more secure domestic generation can reduce our exposure to those shocks and give families and businesses greater certainty.
And it is about jobs to. Hunterston s demonstrated that nuclear investment can deliver highly skilled unionised jobs, apprenticeships, engineering expertise and opportunities for local supply chains. We should build on that legacy, not turn our backs on it. We should back offshore wind and we should invest in new technologies. And we should look seriously at new generation of nuclear power. That is a balanced approach that Scotland needs. However, the Scottish Government's energy strategy is nearly three years late.
Families and businesses across Ayrshire need certainty now. They want to see new investment in new nuclear energy. Plainly speaking, they want to see the creation of Hunterston C Hunterston showed us what is possible. Chance is showing us it is still possible. Scotland needs the ambition to build the next generation of new nuclear. And the Scottish Labour Party and UK Labour Government are ready to work with the SNP government to deliver that energy, certainty, investment and ambition for our communities and our young people.
So will the SNP government drop their ideology on nuclear to help Scotland's energy future? That's the question.
For almost 46 years, that nuclear power station provided reliable, low carbon electricity to Scotland. At its peak, Hunterston B generated enough electricity to power almost 2 million homes a year. Over its lifetime, it produced just under 300 terawatt hours of electricity, enough to power every home in Scotland for more than 30 years while avoiding more than 100 million tonnes of carbon emissions. It supported around 500 jobs, 250 contractors and made a major contribution to Ayrshire's economy.
That is a remarkable legacy and so is the legacy of tenderness, which is now Scotland's most productive clean power asset in Scotland's history. Since coming online in 1988, that generated more than 300 terawatts of. Hours, hours of electricity and that is enough power for every home in Scotland for around 36 years. And it also helped to avoid more than 100 million tonnes of CO2 emissions. These are not just statistics. They demonstrate what nuclear power has delivered for Scotland and continued and can continue to do so.
And yet Scotland has no new nuclear power station under construction and no future plan in that matters, because nuclear and renewables should not be presented as alternatives. Scotland needs both. Wind power is one of our greatest strengths, but wind does not blow every hour of every day. Nuclear provides dependable, low carbon electricity alongside renewables, renewables and for families and businesses. In my constituency in Kilmarnock and right across Scotland, energy security matters. We have all seen how the global events can send our energy prices soaring more, more, more secure domestic generation can reduce our exposure to those shocks and give families and businesses greater certainty.
And it is about jobs to. Hunterston s demonstrated that nuclear investment can deliver highly skilled unionised jobs, apprenticeships, engineering expertise and opportunities for local supply chains. We should build on that legacy, not turn our backs on it. We should back offshore wind and we should invest in new technologies. And we should look seriously at new generation of nuclear power. That is a balanced approach that Scotland needs. However, the Scottish Government's energy strategy is nearly three years late.
Families and businesses across Ayrshire need certainty now. They want to see new investment in new nuclear energy. Plainly speaking, they want to see the creation of Hunterston C Hunterston showed us what is possible. Chance is showing us it is still possible. Scotland needs the ambition to build the next generation of new nuclear. And the Scottish Labour Party and UK Labour Government are ready to work with the SNP government to deliver that energy, certainty, investment and ambition for our communities and our young people.
So will the SNP government drop their ideology on nuclear to help Scotland's energy future? That's the question.
17:21
17:21
Speaker 35
-
Speaker 35
Mr. Stewart, and it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And I thank the honourable member from Dumbarton for securing this very important debate in Ayrshire coalfields. Generations of Scots once powered this country and as we look to the next generation of clean, reliable energy, Scotland needs to grasp the opportunity of nuclear power to help power our nation once again. Let me be clear investing in nuclear is not an argument against wind power or renewables.
Scotland is an extraordinary renewable potential and wind and solar remained remains central to our energy future. However, when the wind doesn't blow and that is not too often in my area. I grant you we do need reliable power to back it up. It is very clear nuclear does not replace Unknowables and it complements them. While the UK government moves ahead with major new nuclear investment, the Scottish Government is refusing to act.
That inaction has cost. It's mean, has, has its cost, its means and we are exposed to volatile gas markets more dependent on imported fuels and more vulnerable to foreign conflicts thousands of miles away that drive up our bills here at home. This is not just about energy security. It's about jobs, and it's about fairness. When the coal mining declined, it took jobs and investment with it. And too many communities like mine are still feeling that loss today.
Scotland has missed out on nearly 5000 jobs, with skilled Scots workers travelling south. Instead of working at home. They are just. These are not just jobs, these are apprenticeships for our young people. Supply chain and decades of stable, well-paid employment that also matters for our clean energy goals. We are committed to ambitious decarbonisation targets and nuclear is proven low carbon technology, technology. I'm trying to go as fast as I can, technology that can help us get there without relying on gas.
These countries achieve the fastest, most reliable decarbonisation. That's me.
Scotland is an extraordinary renewable potential and wind and solar remained remains central to our energy future. However, when the wind doesn't blow and that is not too often in my area. I grant you we do need reliable power to back it up. It is very clear nuclear does not replace Unknowables and it complements them. While the UK government moves ahead with major new nuclear investment, the Scottish Government is refusing to act.
That inaction has cost. It's mean, has, has its cost, its means and we are exposed to volatile gas markets more dependent on imported fuels and more vulnerable to foreign conflicts thousands of miles away that drive up our bills here at home. This is not just about energy security. It's about jobs, and it's about fairness. When the coal mining declined, it took jobs and investment with it. And too many communities like mine are still feeling that loss today.
Scotland has missed out on nearly 5000 jobs, with skilled Scots workers travelling south. Instead of working at home. They are just. These are not just jobs, these are apprenticeships for our young people. Supply chain and decades of stable, well-paid employment that also matters for our clean energy goals. We are committed to ambitious decarbonisation targets and nuclear is proven low carbon technology, technology. I'm trying to go as fast as I can, technology that can help us get there without relying on gas.
These countries achieve the fastest, most reliable decarbonisation. That's me.
17:23
17:23
Speaker 36
-
Speaker 36
Thank you very much, Mr. Stewart. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I congratulate my hon. Friend for securing this debate. Now, as regards the good natured jibe from the hon. Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh, I received it in the manner of which. But I. I Ken his his mother quite well, so I'll be having a wee word in another place. My party's policy is to support small modular reactors, and we make no bones about it.
The rollout of these can provide a huge, cost effective and safe decarbonisation mix, and we also believe that planning should involve taking peoples with you. And that takes me straight away to what my hon. Friend, let me get this absolutely right. Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale mentioned Dounreay. Now done. Reay was an example. Prior to 195455 of the tragedy of Highland depopulation. If you drive up the A9 from Latheron to Thurso, you see cottages, crofts with their open to the skies.
People had gone and it was the curse. That is why there are so many people from Highland families living in all corners of the world. In 19541955, the planning application to build the reactor at Dounreay went through. Can you believe this? Mr. Stewart went through planning in three days flat. Change days indeed. And I can say that it was a godsend for the area. Not only did it halt Highland depopulation, but it reversed it, and we had people moving in and the schoolgirls going up.
And I think it would be fair to say that not just in Caithness, but in the wider area of Sutherland, many as a person would work at Dounreay and still does today, and some would have a croft, which they'd work at during the day and go back and run the croft in their other time. And so I could say that the advent of Dounreay literally literally kept the lights on in the Straths and Glens of the Highlands.
And I think none of us should ever, ever forget that Highland Council, the local authority, is just the same as the other councils we've heard about. It is keen to get a new reactor, an SMR, at Doune Reay Great British Energy. As my colleagues have mentioned, they specifically mention Dounreay as being absolutely suitable for an SMR. And here's the nub of it. And this is really my conclusion, Mr.
Stewart, is that at Dounreay, the first one of the first sites ever in the UK, we have a licensed site. That's pretty important. We have a highly skilled workforce, and we have a local population that would warmly welcome an SMR. All the bits of the jigsaw are in place. And yet. And yet we've heard repeatedly as to what the roadblock is. Well, to show that perhaps the nicest side of my nature, if there is one, could I just gently point to the fact that the Scottish Government that plied Kamru.
They have embraced the concept of new nuclear, as we've already heard in Wales. So I do hope that plied and the SNP will talk to each other because at the end of the day, you can't just go on punting out old policies which have absolutely no practical application whatsoever in Scotland. I hope they take my advice and I long for the day when the jobs come back to Dounreay through an SMR.
The rollout of these can provide a huge, cost effective and safe decarbonisation mix, and we also believe that planning should involve taking peoples with you. And that takes me straight away to what my hon. Friend, let me get this absolutely right. Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale mentioned Dounreay. Now done. Reay was an example. Prior to 195455 of the tragedy of Highland depopulation. If you drive up the A9 from Latheron to Thurso, you see cottages, crofts with their open to the skies.
People had gone and it was the curse. That is why there are so many people from Highland families living in all corners of the world. In 19541955, the planning application to build the reactor at Dounreay went through. Can you believe this? Mr. Stewart went through planning in three days flat. Change days indeed. And I can say that it was a godsend for the area. Not only did it halt Highland depopulation, but it reversed it, and we had people moving in and the schoolgirls going up.
And I think it would be fair to say that not just in Caithness, but in the wider area of Sutherland, many as a person would work at Dounreay and still does today, and some would have a croft, which they'd work at during the day and go back and run the croft in their other time. And so I could say that the advent of Dounreay literally literally kept the lights on in the Straths and Glens of the Highlands.
And I think none of us should ever, ever forget that Highland Council, the local authority, is just the same as the other councils we've heard about. It is keen to get a new reactor, an SMR, at Doune Reay Great British Energy. As my colleagues have mentioned, they specifically mention Dounreay as being absolutely suitable for an SMR. And here's the nub of it. And this is really my conclusion, Mr.
Stewart, is that at Dounreay, the first one of the first sites ever in the UK, we have a licensed site. That's pretty important. We have a highly skilled workforce, and we have a local population that would warmly welcome an SMR. All the bits of the jigsaw are in place. And yet. And yet we've heard repeatedly as to what the roadblock is. Well, to show that perhaps the nicest side of my nature, if there is one, could I just gently point to the fact that the Scottish Government that plied Kamru.
They have embraced the concept of new nuclear, as we've already heard in Wales. So I do hope that plied and the SNP will talk to each other because at the end of the day, you can't just go on punting out old policies which have absolutely no practical application whatsoever in Scotland. I hope they take my advice and I long for the day when the jobs come back to Dounreay through an SMR.
17:27
17:27
Speaker 27
-
Speaker 27
Thank you, Mr. Stewart. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I welcome the Minister to her place today. I also want to thank the honourable member for Dunbartonshire for bringing this debate, and I welcome the Scottish Liberal Democrats getting off the fence and finally backing new nuclear. Find
17:27
17:27
Speaker 27
-
Speaker 27
mother is. The Prime Minister mentioned déja vu at Prime Minister's Questions, and I must feel I'm suffering from a bit of the same today, chair, because I fondly remember many debates in the Scottish Parliament where I made the case for new nuclear in Scotland, but it was always blocked by the SNP, and I have always maintained that we should have an energy mix and nuclear is vital for our baseload. When the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow, and without nuclear, it would be a real struggle for the Scottish Parliament to get the Scottish Government to get to net zero.
I heard some of the contributions today. The member from Dunbartonshire was right to point out skills and opportunities. It is a. It could be a real path for oil and gas workers to make that transition. And another key thing that was mentioned was grid stability that I actually hadn't thought of earlier. The inertia from the large. The power stations that we have just now is vital to keeping the grid stable and would be good to hear from the minister what plans there are to replace that once Torness closes.
My honourable friend from Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweedbank described the renaissance of of nuclear. All the benefits. But Scotland are being left behind just now, being left behind in jobs, skills and also the local economy . And instead SNP want to carpet bomb our countryside with monster pylons and battery storage. Now it is clear that the. It is clear. I will give way. Yes.
I heard some of the contributions today. The member from Dunbartonshire was right to point out skills and opportunities. It is a. It could be a real path for oil and gas workers to make that transition. And another key thing that was mentioned was grid stability that I actually hadn't thought of earlier. The inertia from the large. The power stations that we have just now is vital to keeping the grid stable and would be good to hear from the minister what plans there are to replace that once Torness closes.
My honourable friend from Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweedbank described the renaissance of of nuclear. All the benefits. But Scotland are being left behind just now, being left behind in jobs, skills and also the local economy . And instead SNP want to carpet bomb our countryside with monster pylons and battery storage. Now it is clear that the. It is clear. I will give way. Yes.
17:29
17:29
Speaker 27
-
Speaker 27
We actually would be probably building new nuclear power stations where the grid already is. You know, we already have the grid connection at Hunterston, already have the grid connection at Torness. So it's exactly why we should be backing new nuclear. But it is clear that the SNP's effective ban on new nuclear power is holding Scotland back, both in terms of our energy transition and our economy, because right now Scotland has the most expensive and vulnerable grid in the UK, and much of that is down to the fact that the SNP have turned their backs on nuclear.
Now, when I was an MSP, I was fortunate enough to visit Hunterston B and what a wasted opportunity that is. It was mentioned earlier. It has the grid connection, it has the space, it's all there. It just needs the political will to make it happen. So we can have Hunterston C and as we progress to sourcing more and more of our energy from renewables like wind, the problem of intermittency will only get worse.
But the irony is that the SNP's own irrational opposition to new nuclear means that a future Scotland would be completely reliant on English nuclear power. When the wind does not blow and sun does not shine. Now, luckily we do have a UK grid, so we share the power with our neighbours. Scotland will not face blackouts because of this SNP's failures. But while our shared grid means Scotland will not miss out on imported nuclear energy thanks to the SNP's blind opposition, we are missing out on thousands of jobs and billions of pounds of investment now.
When I was at Hunterston, I met the young graduates and apprentices there during my visit and it was heartbreaking. Heartbreaking to hear that for them to have a future in nuclear, they were going to have to move away from Scotland. Talented young people, highly paid jobs, moving away because the SNP's dogma. It was interesting to hear that 1 in 10 in Hinkley Point C were Scots. And what makes the SNP's Luddite approach totally senseless is that people in Scotland want new nuclear.
We have heard it again tonight. 60% of the Scottish public are in favour of building new nuclear power stations to replace those being decommissioned. East Lothian, Dumfries and Galloway and the Highland Council have all called for new nuclear development. Many of the jobs and investment that could be generated by new nuclear would go to some of Scotland's most deprived communities. We are in desperate, desperate need of thriving local industries.
Yet the SNP, who love to talk about devolution, have overruled those local wishes . For far too long. The SNP have weaponised devolved powers over planning to block new nuclear, which of course is a reserved issue. The SNP's bizarre opposition to this clean, consistent energy goes against science, against all common sense and against the wishes of the Scottish public and the clear cross-party consensus from the Scottish MPs in the room tonight, apart from Mr. Lee and the SNP, of course, shows just how backward John Swinney's position really is.
I thank everyone for their contributions to this important debate, and very much hope that nuclear energy will have a bright future in Scotland, because if we are to transition beyond fossil fuels in the long term, nuclear will be a vital part of our energy mix and Scotland must not miss out as a result of the SNP Luddites. Thank you chair.
Now, when I was an MSP, I was fortunate enough to visit Hunterston B and what a wasted opportunity that is. It was mentioned earlier. It has the grid connection, it has the space, it's all there. It just needs the political will to make it happen. So we can have Hunterston C and as we progress to sourcing more and more of our energy from renewables like wind, the problem of intermittency will only get worse.
But the irony is that the SNP's own irrational opposition to new nuclear means that a future Scotland would be completely reliant on English nuclear power. When the wind does not blow and sun does not shine. Now, luckily we do have a UK grid, so we share the power with our neighbours. Scotland will not face blackouts because of this SNP's failures. But while our shared grid means Scotland will not miss out on imported nuclear energy thanks to the SNP's blind opposition, we are missing out on thousands of jobs and billions of pounds of investment now.
When I was at Hunterston, I met the young graduates and apprentices there during my visit and it was heartbreaking. Heartbreaking to hear that for them to have a future in nuclear, they were going to have to move away from Scotland. Talented young people, highly paid jobs, moving away because the SNP's dogma. It was interesting to hear that 1 in 10 in Hinkley Point C were Scots. And what makes the SNP's Luddite approach totally senseless is that people in Scotland want new nuclear.
We have heard it again tonight. 60% of the Scottish public are in favour of building new nuclear power stations to replace those being decommissioned. East Lothian, Dumfries and Galloway and the Highland Council have all called for new nuclear development. Many of the jobs and investment that could be generated by new nuclear would go to some of Scotland's most deprived communities. We are in desperate, desperate need of thriving local industries.
Yet the SNP, who love to talk about devolution, have overruled those local wishes . For far too long. The SNP have weaponised devolved powers over planning to block new nuclear, which of course is a reserved issue. The SNP's bizarre opposition to this clean, consistent energy goes against science, against all common sense and against the wishes of the Scottish public and the clear cross-party consensus from the Scottish MPs in the room tonight, apart from Mr. Lee and the SNP, of course, shows just how backward John Swinney's position really is.
I thank everyone for their contributions to this important debate, and very much hope that nuclear energy will have a bright future in Scotland, because if we are to transition beyond fossil fuels in the long term, nuclear will be a vital part of our energy mix and Scotland must not miss out as a result of the SNP Luddites. Thank you chair.
17:33
17:33
17:33
17:33
Speaker 38
-
Speaker 38
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. Let me begin by congratulating the honourable member for Middleton Barton for securing this important debate on the future of nuclear energy in Scotland. I thank her for her kind words as well. I agreed with many of the points that she made in her speech. This debate comes at an opportune time, and I am pleased to be responding, and to have heard from so many who share this government's desire to see Scotland harness the opportunities that civil nuclear power offers to Scotland.
The opportunity to create high quality jobs in communities across our country. The opportunity to deliver clean, secure and more affordable energy for our people as part of the energy mix of the future. But it is also an opportunity to deliver on our Prime Minister's mission to reindustrialize our country, to ensure that conversations about Scotland's industrial prowess are not just backwards looking at our heritage, but building our future with prosperous, secure and proud communities sustained by skilled jobs.
Scotland is indeed an energy powerhouse. And since taking up my position at the Scotland Office, I have had the privilege of witnessing a vast array of Scottish energy generation firsthand, spanning wind, wave, tidal and nuclear energy, and, above all, meeting the skilled and dedicated workforces that keep our nation powered. And just last month, the Secretary of State was in Aberdeen, meeting with representatives from the oil and gas sector and visiting Great British Energy's newly opened headquarters.
This week I went to the station at Torness, which is one of the great Scottish nuclear power success stories. As we've heard in today's debate, it provides hundreds of quality jobs in East Lothian and beyond, while generating enough electricity over its lifetime to power every home in Scotland for 36 years. As we have heard today, Torness is currently due to stop generating power by 2030. The reason that this site days are numbered is the SNP's outdated ideological planning ban on civil nuclear energy.
And as we've heard today, it is time that that changed. Certainly.
The opportunity to create high quality jobs in communities across our country. The opportunity to deliver clean, secure and more affordable energy for our people as part of the energy mix of the future. But it is also an opportunity to deliver on our Prime Minister's mission to reindustrialize our country, to ensure that conversations about Scotland's industrial prowess are not just backwards looking at our heritage, but building our future with prosperous, secure and proud communities sustained by skilled jobs.
Scotland is indeed an energy powerhouse. And since taking up my position at the Scotland Office, I have had the privilege of witnessing a vast array of Scottish energy generation firsthand, spanning wind, wave, tidal and nuclear energy, and, above all, meeting the skilled and dedicated workforces that keep our nation powered. And just last month, the Secretary of State was in Aberdeen, meeting with representatives from the oil and gas sector and visiting Great British Energy's newly opened headquarters.
This week I went to the station at Torness, which is one of the great Scottish nuclear power success stories. As we've heard in today's debate, it provides hundreds of quality jobs in East Lothian and beyond, while generating enough electricity over its lifetime to power every home in Scotland for 36 years. As we have heard today, Torness is currently due to stop generating power by 2030. The reason that this site days are numbered is the SNP's outdated ideological planning ban on civil nuclear energy.
And as we've heard today, it is time that that changed. Certainly.
17:35
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
Can I thank. My. Friend for giving way and to see her at her place and thank her for a brilliant visit to Prestwick this week. Can I say how proud I am to join my colleagues, my Labour Ayrshire colleagues in calling for nuclear back in Ayrshire at Hunterston and how frustrated I am at the lack of skills, lack of jobs, lack of investment in our communities. Can she say anything about why this anti-scientific, irrational stance of the SNP is continuing?
17:35
Speaker 38
-
Speaker 38
Well, we have had a strong showing from colleagues from Ayrshire in the debate today. And as my friend points out, because of the impact that the closure of Hunterston has had on on their communities, and what I would say is that the SNP will need to answer to the people of Ayrshire about why they have taken away the possibility of thousands of new jobs in their communities. There is no logical reason for it. As I was saying this week, I went to the power station in in Torness and visiting there brought home what is at stake in this debate.
It is families, futures. Highly skilled workers at Torness told me that they will likely have no option but to leave their homes in Scotland when the station there closes. Taking those specialist skills elsewhere to England and Wales or even overseas. Some of those men and women are part of generations of the same family that have worked at that site, and their rightful pride in that heritage was clear to see. Now the honourable member for Dunbartonshire asked if Torness could theoretically go beyond 2030, and the answer is that if EDF wished to do that and made a successful case to the regulator, then indeed it is possible that that could happen.
Mr. Stewart, this is a debate that needs to take place with the focus on the facts about civil nuclear power. There is too much myth and fallacy around on this topic. The British nuclear sector continues to operate safely and securely, and that is not simply the industry's assertion. It is the evidence based conclusion of the independent Chief Nuclear Inspector in his recent annual report , and the UN International Atomic Energy Agency calls nuclear one of the safest forms of energy generation that there is.
My hon. Friend the member for Alloa and Grangemouth helpfully trailed his speech today in the media at the weekend. So I asked the unite shop steward at Torness what he thought of the suggestion that we should make decisions about what is best for the future of our country, based on the potential likes and dislikes of Vladimir Putin. His answer, and I quote, was that this is clutching at straws. He also mentioned construction.
I would refer him to the 26,000 new jobs created by construction at Hinkley Point C. The reality is that countries such as Denmark, Poland and Japan are actively stepping up their plans on nuclear energy, whilst others such as Sweden, Belgium and Italy are reversing their previous anti-nuclear stances. 70% of electricity in France is supplied by nuclear power, as we have heard, and to be anti-nuclear power in Europe today is increasingly to be an outlier. And I say to the SNP that Scotland deserves better than this.
I will.
It is families, futures. Highly skilled workers at Torness told me that they will likely have no option but to leave their homes in Scotland when the station there closes. Taking those specialist skills elsewhere to England and Wales or even overseas. Some of those men and women are part of generations of the same family that have worked at that site, and their rightful pride in that heritage was clear to see. Now the honourable member for Dunbartonshire asked if Torness could theoretically go beyond 2030, and the answer is that if EDF wished to do that and made a successful case to the regulator, then indeed it is possible that that could happen.
Mr. Stewart, this is a debate that needs to take place with the focus on the facts about civil nuclear power. There is too much myth and fallacy around on this topic. The British nuclear sector continues to operate safely and securely, and that is not simply the industry's assertion. It is the evidence based conclusion of the independent Chief Nuclear Inspector in his recent annual report , and the UN International Atomic Energy Agency calls nuclear one of the safest forms of energy generation that there is.
My hon. Friend the member for Alloa and Grangemouth helpfully trailed his speech today in the media at the weekend. So I asked the unite shop steward at Torness what he thought of the suggestion that we should make decisions about what is best for the future of our country, based on the potential likes and dislikes of Vladimir Putin. His answer, and I quote, was that this is clutching at straws. He also mentioned construction.
I would refer him to the 26,000 new jobs created by construction at Hinkley Point C. The reality is that countries such as Denmark, Poland and Japan are actively stepping up their plans on nuclear energy, whilst others such as Sweden, Belgium and Italy are reversing their previous anti-nuclear stances. 70% of electricity in France is supplied by nuclear power, as we have heard, and to be anti-nuclear power in Europe today is increasingly to be an outlier. And I say to the SNP that Scotland deserves better than this.
I will.
17:38
Speaker 31
-
Speaker 31
I think that I welcome the third place, first of all. But to suggest being anti-nuclear is being anti baseload or being anti other forms of a useful energy that can provide baseload is absolute nonsense. Will the Minister accept that this is a very blinkered approach, looking at only nuclear and not backing things like geothermal, not backing things like tidal energy properly because we could be making we we could be creating many jobs in Scotland from those.
And God knows we know how to drill a hole and get stuff out of it.
And God knows we know how to drill a hole and get stuff out of it.
17:39
17:39
17:39
Speaker 38
-
Speaker 38
Certainly didn't say that we were anti baseload. That would be a ridiculous argument. In fact, this government and I am proud that this government is making record investment in renewable energy. And I mentioned at the start of my speech, having visited some of it myself since I was appointed. The point I'm making is that the SNP Scottish Government is leaving Scotland behind in terms of jobs and opportunities. And speaking of which, we know that the UK used to lead the world.
Scotland used to lead the world on nuclear power. And on that note, it was interesting to hear the comments of the honourable member for Aberdeen South and his party in recent days. They might need this Labour government to remind them that in 14 years of Tory rule, their record on investment in new nuclear energy was zero. So their newfound enthusiasm rings a little hollow. And we reject to their proposals made by party spokespeople to rip up the Scotland Act and override Holyrood's planning powers to force nuclear projects through.
This government will not take that path. We believe in the decentralization of power and we respect devolution. Very briefly.
Scotland used to lead the world on nuclear power. And on that note, it was interesting to hear the comments of the honourable member for Aberdeen South and his party in recent days. They might need this Labour government to remind them that in 14 years of Tory rule, their record on investment in new nuclear energy was zero. So their newfound enthusiasm rings a little hollow. And we reject to their proposals made by party spokespeople to rip up the Scotland Act and override Holyrood's planning powers to force nuclear projects through.
This government will not take that path. We believe in the decentralization of power and we respect devolution. Very briefly.
17:40
17:40
Speaker 25
-
Speaker 25
Going to persuade the SNP to change their position? Because if they don't change their position, there won't be nuclear in Scotland because there will be no investment. Because even if there was a Labour administration, people will know it could change. And we only got nuclear investment in the UK. When people understood that both Labour and the conservatives backed nuclear.
17:40
17:40
Speaker 38
-
Speaker 38
Honestly have more time for that argument if the conservative government had themselves invested in this anywhere in the UK during their 14 years in power. The fact is that the arguments against the Scottish Government's position are strong. The UK government is committed to supporting this industry, and we have heard throughout this debate about the jobs, the 5000 jobs that Scotland has already missed out on because of this de facto ban. We have heard about the investment that is taking place in England and Wales, and Scotland could have this too.
We in Scotland know the story of deindustrialisation of our communities. The Clyde knows the story Lanarkshire and Ayrshire does. As we have heard from my colleagues today in my area in Fife knows the story. These are lessons that the Scottish Government should learn . And so we have heard so much about the disparity that exists with the rest of the UK. I would simply point out, as I said earlier, that many Scots say that they will be forced to take their skills elsewhere.
Many of them already are. We can see, for example, the 184 Scottish businesses that are supporting Hinkley Point C's supply chain during its construction, and the 10% of the 12,000 workers on that construction site who are Scottish workers forced to travel elsewhere to do those jobs? I know that I need to wrap up, and so I would simply say the following. Companies across Scotland have expressed great interest in supporting the development of our nuclear industry.
We heard about the potential that there is at Dounreay. We know that there is further potential across Scotland, including at Torness. I would say also that it is worth noting that 57% of SNP voters say that they support new nuclear energy in Scotland. Trade unions such as the GMB, Prospect and Unite are telling us that they want to grasp these opportunities and the SNP should back them. So in conclusion, Mr.
Stuart Scotland stands at a critical juncture. The Scottish Government cannot stand by and watch jobs opportunity and Scottish workers go elsewhere, or they can change course and work together with the UK government, embrace civil nuclear power as part of our energy mix, and make sure that Scotland remains an energy leader for generations to come.
We in Scotland know the story of deindustrialisation of our communities. The Clyde knows the story Lanarkshire and Ayrshire does. As we have heard from my colleagues today in my area in Fife knows the story. These are lessons that the Scottish Government should learn . And so we have heard so much about the disparity that exists with the rest of the UK. I would simply point out, as I said earlier, that many Scots say that they will be forced to take their skills elsewhere.
Many of them already are. We can see, for example, the 184 Scottish businesses that are supporting Hinkley Point C's supply chain during its construction, and the 10% of the 12,000 workers on that construction site who are Scottish workers forced to travel elsewhere to do those jobs? I know that I need to wrap up, and so I would simply say the following. Companies across Scotland have expressed great interest in supporting the development of our nuclear industry.
We heard about the potential that there is at Dounreay. We know that there is further potential across Scotland, including at Torness. I would say also that it is worth noting that 57% of SNP voters say that they support new nuclear energy in Scotland. Trade unions such as the GMB, Prospect and Unite are telling us that they want to grasp these opportunities and the SNP should back them. So in conclusion, Mr.
Stuart Scotland stands at a critical juncture. The Scottish Government cannot stand by and watch jobs opportunity and Scottish workers go elsewhere, or they can change course and work together with the UK government, embrace civil nuclear power as part of our energy mix, and make sure that Scotland remains an energy leader for generations to come.
17:43
17:43
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
Thank you, Mr. Stewart. I'm really pleased to have heard so many excellent contributions to the debate this afternoon. And and thank you to the Minister, the opposition spokesperson and my honourable friend for the comments that they have been making. It is clear that there is a majority agreement in the room. It is clear that there is an opportunity for Scotland to be an energy source, a powerhouse for the UK, and it is clear that the SNP is refusing to grasp the opportunity for families and communities.
Despite the good examples that they can see in other countries of this being successful. So I would just urge to the government to keep pressing the Scottish Government to reconsider its position. Thank you.
Despite the good examples that they can see in other countries of this being successful. So I would just urge to the government to keep pressing the Scottish Government to reconsider its position. Thank you.