(1 day, 8 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The workforce plan will be published this spring, so there is not too long to wait. It has taken a little longer than we initially hoped, but we think it is really important to ensure that it is anchored in very solid engagement with our partners and stakeholders.
Earlier this year, the Government delivered fast-track legislation to put UK medical graduates at the front of the queue for foundation and specialty training places, reducing uncertainty and ensuring that they can progress to full registration as doctors. We have confirmed that all eligible UK medical graduates will be offered a place on the foundation programme this year. Of course, our fast-track legislation seeks to rectify the unforgivably reckless and damaging decision made by the previous Government to remove the resident labour market test after Brexit, which in many ways is the root cause of the mess created by the neglect and incompetence of the previous Government over 14 years.
I turn now to the process for allocating places to applicants for the UK foundation programme and the steps the Government are taking to improve it. We recognise that the location a foundation doctor is assigned for training has both professional and personal impacts. The four UK Health Departments determine the number of places available each year based on workforce planning across the continuum of postgraduate medical education and training. Applicants are allocated across the UK using a nationally applied preference informed allocation system, which has been extensively commented on in the debate.
The PIA system was introduced in 2024, following extensive engagement with the four UK statutory education bodies, medical students and key stakeholders. The move to the new system aimed to address concerns that the previous system was unfair and stressful for applicants and that there was a lack of standardisation within and across schools. It is worth mentioning that the consultation on the PIA system received over 14,500 responses, 66% of which favoured a move to the PIA option against the status quo. There were 106 organisations among those 14,500 responses. It was an extensive consultation with fairly conclusive feedback on the change that was required.
Ayoub Khan
In relation to the consultation on the PIA system, does the Minister agree that, if there is no appeal process in the system, it cannot be fair, because there will be extenuating circumstances that ought to be considered? That is something I suspect the Government could implement relatively easily.
It is worth highlighting that around 82% of applicants get their first preference. That is a significant improvement—it was 71% in 2023. We are taking steps in the right direction, but we would love to get to 100%. It is difficult to get to 100% of anything in a large and complex system, but that is our aspiration. Of course, those who do not get their first place are welcome to re-engage with the system, and efforts are made to ensure they get their preference, although we do not always succeed in that process. I will take the hon. Member’s question away and discuss it with my colleague the Minister of State for Health—she leads on this portfolio, although she was not available for this debate—and we will write to him with further clarifications on the important point he makes.
The introduction of the PIA was broadly supported by stakeholders, and I am pleased that we have seen an improvement under this system in the number of students allocated their first preference programme. As I said, 82% of applicants to this year’s foundation programme were allocated their first preference, up from 71% in 2023. However, we are committed to ensuring that the system remains fit for purpose. NHS England will conduct a review to ensure that it is still working for applicants. The timelines of that review will be confirmed in due course.
Furthermore, although some individuals may want to move away from their university area for foundation training, some need greater certainty, for a range of reasons, about their foundation placements. In the last two years, we have supported a portion of students in three UK medical schools by allocating them to foundation programmes in their local area. Last Friday we went further, announcing that we will work with medical schools and foundation schools to extend that support to trainees across the country from disadvantaged backgrounds. Providing a post close to where they live will mean more stability for trainees and will support employers in developing a local workforce.
I would like to say a final word on the PIA. I think we all accept that it is not perfect—it is very difficult to have a perfect system—but I take issue with the characterisation by some Members in the debate that it is a random system. We do not agree with that characterisation. We are clear that the system in place is enabling people to clearly articulate their first preference, and in the overwhelming majority of cases they are getting their first preference. That does not feel like a random system to us, but we absolutely accept that it is not perfect, and there is always room for improvement.
Let me turn to rotations. We recognise the importance of stability for doctors in training and the impact that frequent relocations can have on wellbeing, retention and workforce planning. Following the 2024 resident doctors agreement, the Department of Health and Social Care conducted a review of rotational training and found that rotations can provide valuable breadth of experience. However, we know that in some cases they can disrupt learning, wellbeing, team integration and patient care. To tackle that, NHS England is developing pilots under the medical education and training review to test longer placements and more flexible arrangements for less-than-full-time trainees. The evaluation of those pilots will inform future policy decisions on placement length and continuity benefits.
I turn now to the wider working conditions for resident doctors. It is essential that we create a supportive environment for doctors throughout their training that looks after their health and wellbeing. NHS England’s resident doctors’ working lives programme continues to implement several measures aimed at supporting resident doctors, encouraging them to stay in training and the NHS and reducing overall attrition. That includes measures such as the less-than-full-time training options to allow trainees to continue to work in the service and progress with their training on a reduced working pattern where that is beneficial for their personal circumstances.
We have made significant progress over the past year to improve the working lives of resident doctors, including agreeing an improved exception reporting system, which will ensure that doctors are compensated fairly for additional work, and rationalising statutory and mandatory training to reduce unnecessary burden and repetition.
Sorry; I misunderstood the question. Yes, it is still our intention to double the number of medical school places.
The Government remain committed to publishing a 10-year workforce plan this spring to set out how we will create a workforce ready to deliver the transformed service that we set out in the 10-year health plan. The 10-year workforce plan will ensure that the NHS has the right people, in the right places, with the right skills to care for patients when they need it.
NHS staff told us through the 10-year health plan engagement that they are crying out for change. The workforce plan will set out how we deliver that change by making sure staff are better treated and have better training, more fulfilling roles and hope for the future.
I thank all hon. Members for taking part in this important debate.
Ayoub Khan
I hesitate to interrupt the Minister’s final remarks, but will he shed some light on the strike by young junior doctors? Queen Elizabeth hospital in my constituency serves many local residents. The young doctors I have spoken to talk about the cost of living and the inability to support themselves, at the point when they are entering an exciting career. What more support will the Government provide them with?
That gives me an opportunity to highlight the fact that this Government have delivered a 29% pay increase for resident doctors. Although I absolutely accept that, prior to July 2024, over 14 years of dealing with an incompetent Government, they suffered from being underpaid and neglected, and we had to seek to fix that—we have done that in good faith and with good will—there have to be limits to what we can offer. The sky is not the limit; the limit is the deeply damaged and parlous state of the public finances that were left to us when we took over in July 2024, and the significant pressures across every aspect of Government.
We implore the resident doctors and the BMA to come back to the table. The Secretary of State believed that he had a deal with the officers of the BMA, and those officers then took that deal to the broader committee. There is no doubt that that committee has ideological motivations, and it refused to accept the deal. We are now in a very challenging position. The Secretary of State has asked several times for a face-to-face meeting with the entire committee, and that request has been refused. We have to make progress, but I simply remind its members that most of our constituents would see a 29% pay increase as a pretty positive deal.
(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI thank my hon. Friend for that question and ask him to please pass on my best wishes to his father and thank him for the outstanding service he provided over many years. The Carr-Hill formula review is an important piece of work. It will have a complex range of drivers in it, based on remoteness and coastal areas, but socioeconomic indicators will be very much at its heart. Those are the clear terms of reference that we gave to the National Institute for Health and Care Research, and that is the basis of the review. I expect those documents from officials very soon, and we will update the House accordingly. Some of the process was set out in a “Dear Colleague” letter a little while back, but we are also keen to have feedback from MPs in that process.
Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)
Many of the surgeries in my constituency have faced enormous pressure when having to deal with patients who cannot get an appointment, so I welcome the additional support that will come to our communities, especially inner-city communities. The Laurie Pike and al-Shafa medical centres in my constituency do so much work on prevention; I hope the Minister will join me in commending them on the work they do. Will there be ringfenced funding for preventive work in areas such as cardiovascular disease detection, respiratory illnesses and diabetes?
Please do pass on my thanks to the Laurie Pike and al-Shafa practices for the outstanding work they do. We are not really doing ringfencing; we are embedding prevention in the contract through the quality outcomes framework. Those incentives are the best way to give practices the flexibility they need while ensuring that they are clear about what we expect in terms of outcomes.
Issues such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes are part of the quality outcomes framework. It is also worth mentioning the Pharmacy First scheme, which is looking to move some of this work out of GPs and enabling pharmacists to operate at the top of their practice. That is another example of the shift from hospital to community, which is so important in enabling people to get the best possible care in the right place at the right time, as close as possible to their homes.
(9 months, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I thank and pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this important debate. I commend her for the work she is doing to raise such an important issue, and for sharing her personal experiences in a moving and powerful way, as a parent of a child with Down’s syndrome. I also pay tribute to all the hon. Members who have spoken so powerfully and movingly in this debate.
Last week, we launched our 10-year health plan for the NHS, which creates a new model of care, fit for the future. The neighbourhood health service will help to improve life outcomes for disabled people, including people with Down’s syndrome, by providing access to holistic, ongoing support that is closer to home. Through local commissioning, we will ensure that neighbourhood health services work in partnership with family hubs, schools, nurseries and colleges to offer timely support to children, young people and their families, including those with special educational needs and disabilities.
We have heard powerful testimonies about the challenges associated with Down’s syndrome regression disorder, both for people with Down’s syndrome and for their families and carers. As we have heard, regression describes the loss of previously acquired cognitive and developmental skills in an individual. Down’s syndrome regression disorder is a specific, rare type of regression, which usually presents in adolescence or early adulthood.
People with Down’s syndrome can live full lives pursuing their personal interests, taking up employment, and living independently. However, regression can have a devastating impact for people with Down’s syndrome; the loss of developmental skills can affect daily living, language, motor abilities or social interaction. We know that symptoms can often be overlooked, or misdiagnosed as dementia. We have heard that further awareness and understanding of the disorder is needed. Like with other support for people with Down’s syndrome, it is important that care for regression disorder is personalised and takes into account the specific needs of the individual.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock so clearly explained, there is currently limited understanding of Down’s syndrome regression disorder. We know that experts in the field have looked into regression and developed a position statement on regression in adolescence and early adulthood experienced by people who have Down’s syndrome. This includes recommended healthcare actions for people with Down’s syndrome who show signs of loss of skills or cognitive decline.
There has been some academic research into regression, but there is still much to learn about this disorder and why it happens to some people. We understand that many factors may come into play in causing regression, but the specific underlying cause of Down’s syndrome regression disorder is still unclear. Through its research delivery arm, the National Institute for Health and Care Research, the Department of Health and Social Care welcomes high-quality funding applications from researchers seeking to better understand this condition, and to inform enhanced management and care.
More broadly, patients will receive the most cutting-edge treatment years earlier than planned under the Government’s 10-year health plan, which will speed up clinical trials so that the UK becomes a hotbed of innovation. Millions of people will now be able to search for and sign up to life-changing clinical trials via the NIHR Be Part of Research service on the NHS app, allowing patients to browse and find the trials best suited to their interests and needs.
The Government are committed to improving life outcomes for people with Down’s syndrome, including those who have regression disorder. In order to achieve this, it is vital that we raise awareness of the needs of people with Down’s syndrome. We know that despite many positive developments, such as increased life expectancy, people with Down’s syndrome do not always receive the care and support they need to lead the lives they want to lead in their communities.
Ayoub Khan
First, I apologise to the hon. Member for Thurrock for using clumsy language—I meant no discourtesy. We have been discussing PIP and how it could impact many people who require care. Regression can happen very suddenly for people with Down’s syndrome, which is concerning because we are still looking at research and the methods for getting a final determination. Will the Government incorporate something, such as financial care packages and so forth, to deal with the additional care required by those individuals?
As the Government have made clear throughout the debate on reforming the welfare system, those who need to be supported and protected will be supported and protected, so I can reassure the hon. Gentleman on that point. There is clearly a lot of work to do through the review that will be led by the Minister for Social Security and Disability, my right hon. Friend the Member for East Ham (Sir Stephen Timms). This will be an important part of his work.
Through the implementation of the Down Syndrome Act 2022, we will improve awareness and understanding of the needs of people with Down’s syndrome and how to meet them. The Act requires the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to give guidance to relevant authorities, including local authorities, education and housing services, on the appropriate steps they should be taking to meet the needs of people with Down’s syndrome in exercising their relevant functions.
Work to develop the statutory guidance under the Act is being taken forward as a priority, with a view to issuing it for consultation in the autumn. The shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Melton and Syston (Edward Argar), asked about that. We looked at publishing it over the summer, but we received feedback from stakeholder groups that parents in particular are often busy with their kids over the summer, so it is better to wait until the autumn. That is what we are doing, and we will be publishing it as soon as the school holidays are over.
Officials have considered a range of evidence and engaged extensively with sector partners to inform the development of the guidance. This includes a national call for evidence, which received more than 1,500 responses. A summary report of its findings will be published ahead of, or alongside, issuing the draft guidance for consultation. Based on what we were told during the call for evidence and our subsequent engagement with sector partners and experts, a needs profile has been developed setting out the different needs of people with Down’s syndrome, including people with Down’s syndrome regression disorder. We intend to publish the needs profile paper alongside the draft guidance this autumn to ensure full transparency.
The guidance itself will raise awareness of the specific needs of people with Down’s syndrome, including health needs such as unexplained regression. The guidance will also set out practical steps that relevant authorities should take to meet the needs of people with Down’s syndrome.
We have made significant progress in developing the guidance. We are working closely with relevant Government Departments and sector partners to ensure that it is helpful, accurate and fully reflective of the latest developments in Government policy. Crucially, that engagement has involved people with lived experience of Down’s syndrome, as well as organisations that support people with Down’s syndrome, other conditions and/or a learning disability.
On 4 June, I met the all-party parliamentary group on Down syndrome and provided an update on the latest progress on the guidance. We discussed how we can ensure that the guidance is as effective and impactful as possible. The latest version of the draft guidance, which has had input from all relevant Government Departments, was also shared with sector partners in June for their feedback.
Officials are reviewing that feedback ahead of issuing the guidance for consultation this autumn, which will provide a further opportunity for individuals and organisations to share their views. We remain committed to delivering high-quality guidance that supports improved outcomes for people with Down’s syndrome, while bringing wider benefit where possible. To support implementation of the guidance, NHS England published statutory guidance on 9 May 2023 requiring that every integrated care board must have a named leader for Down’s syndrome.
The 10-year health plan will ensure a better health service for everyone, regardless of condition or service area. We want disabled people’s access to and experience of healthcare services to be equitable, effective and responsive to their needs. Significant engagement took place as part of the 10-year health plan’s development, and informed the final plan. That engagement included a roundtable on learning disability, at which we heard directly from people with Down’s syndrome about their experience of the NHS. We also received contributions from organisations that support and advocate for Down’s syndrome across the health and social care sector.
The 10-year health plan sets the vision for what good, joined-up care looks like for people with a combination of health and care needs, including people with Down’s syndrome regression disorder or other disabilities. The neighbourhood health service will support disabled people to be more active in the delivery and management of their own care. That includes increasing uptake of personal health budgets, which provide individuals with greater choice and flexibility on how their assessed wellbeing needs are met. We know that there are many disabled people, including people with Down’s syndrome, who want to work. The 10-year plan will break down barriers to opportunity by delivering the holistic support that people need to access and thrive in employment.
A number of hon. Members raised questions about training. The guidance will raise awareness of the specific needs of people with Down’s syndrome, including people with regression disorder. We understand that training is an important part of that picture. Under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, providers registered with the Care Quality Commission must ensure that staff receive appropriate professional development necessary for them to carry out their duties. Specific training on learning disability and autism, appropriate to the staff member’s role, is also mandated under the Health and Care Act 2022. We expect that providers should consider whether specific training on Down’s syndrome is required for their staff.
Members also raised questions about funding research into regression disorder. The Department funds health and social care research through the NIHR. The NIHR welcomes funding applications for research into any aspect of human health and care, including Down’s syndrome regression disorder. Such applications are subject to peer review and are judged in open competition, with awards made on the basis of the importance of the topic to patients and to health and care services, value for money, and scientific quality. That enables maximum flexibility, both in the amount of research funding that can be awarded to a particular area, and in the type of research that can be funded.
The NIHR works closely with other Government funders—including UK Research and Innovation, which is funded by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and includes the Medical Research Council—to fund research to improve care and prevent poor health outcomes for people with Down’s syndrome.
The shadow Minister asked a couple of specific questions. I think he mentioned Down’s Syndrome Association-supported research by Cambridge University, and the trials in the United States of America. If it is okay, I will write to him on those points. I am not in a position to address them today.
I hope I have addressed the points raised by hon. Members in this debate. I end by thanking all those who have committed so much time and effort to supporting the development of the guidance under the Down Syndrome Act. We are grateful for the invaluable input that individuals and organisations continue to provide on the draft guidance. Their feedback has been, and is, instrumental in helping us to ensure that the final guidance has maximum benefit. Officials will continue to work with sector partners to ensure that the communities they represent are aware of the forthcoming consultation and can share their views.
I once again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock for securing this important debate, and for all the incredibly important work that she is doing in this area. I also thank all hon. Members for their contributions.