Navendu Mishra debates involving the Department of Health and Social Care during the 2024 Parliament

Tue 10th Nov 2026
Mon 7th Sep 2026
Health Bill
Commons Chamber

Report stage (day 1)
Mon 1st Jun 2026

Stepping Hill Hospital

Navendu Mishra Excerpts
Tuesday 10th November 2026

(1 day, 23 hours ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Tom Morrison Portrait Mr Morrison
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Many of the hospital’s wards are Nightingale wards, which cannot support contemporary care. As I have already mentioned, these wards do not have enough side rooms. That poses a massive risk in terms of infection control, but it also poses challenges when providing patients with the privacy and dignity they need. When patients are receiving end-of-life care, the hospital cannot always provide a separate room, and instead beds are curtained off to give families the privacy they need. To ensure that people are aware, staff place a candle on the ward entrance to tell others that someone is having their last moments with their friends and family. That was the hardest thing to see on our visit. It makes me so angry and ashamed that families in my constituency are saying goodbye to their loved ones in this way.

It is not just the physical infrastructure that needs addressing. Some staff talked me through how outdated computer software and internet connections mean that they have to use memory sticks to take images from one computer to another. Some of the images are for time-critical operations, in which every second counts, yet clinicians, doctors and nurses had no option but to walk memory sticks from one computer to another, wasting precious time.

Finally, let me talk about the conditions the staff work in. The ward designs in the older buildings make staffing a serious challenge. Staff-to-patient ratios mean that nurses must look after no more than eight patients, but some wards have 14 beds, meaning that two nurses are required, despite one of those nurses being underutilised. The staff rooms are also completely inadequate; I saw one room that could fit only two people comfortably, despite there being 12 people on that ward, while the staff room on the cardiology unit, which serves 30 people, has only one toilet.

Navendu Mishra Portrait Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman, my constituency neighbour, on securing this debate on an important issue for the three MPs who represent the local authority of Stockport. I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests regarding my trade union membership and being chair of the all-party parliamentary group on cancer.

All of us in this House would agree that our constituents deserve high-quality, first-class, reliable care in hospitals and from our GPs, and that the staff also deserve high-quality services. I am not sure that I agree with the hon. Gentleman’s suggestion for a new location for a new hospital—I think there should be a wider discussion, but I do not wish to take up too much time in dissecting the Stockport local plan. However, I do agree that Stepping Hill hospital is simply not adequate for patients or staff. Does he agree that in the past two years this Government have allocated £2.5 million for targeted safety works, £26 million for the construction of a new pathology building and £75 million for the Stockport NHS foundation trust over the next four years? That is a stark contrast with the previous 14 years—the coalition Government, of which his party was part, and the Conservative Government that followed.

Tom Morrison Portrait Mr Morrison
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I respect the hon. Gentleman a lot; we all work well together as Stockport MPs. Although we should never say no to money coming into the hospital, even the NHS trust is saying that this money does not touch the sides, as I have said. We need more investment, and the £134 million repair bill needs to be sorted. We can discuss the need for a different site another time; I am fully behind Stockport needing a new hospital site.

I was talking about the staff room for the cardiology unit, which serves 30 people but has only one toilet. That is not to mention the fact that the toilet windows are not frosted over, so there is a massive privacy issue for the staff. I was also told about one member of staff who works in reception in one unit and who uses an electric wheelchair. Horrifyingly, their work environment is completely inadequate, not only because the doors to the unit are not suitable for wheelchairs to go through, but because they cannot access an accessible toilet and so are forced to leave the building in which they work to go to another a few minutes away. Often they have to go out in the rain just to use a facility that they should have the right to use. That is simply a disgrace, and I cannot believe it is happening in 2026.

I asked why that person still felt the need to work there even with such basic accessibility requirements not being met. I was told that it was because they cared so much about the hospital, about Stepping Hill and about the job they do that they would not leave. That was a running theme through our visit. Despite all the issues and problems I have laid out, the staff across Stepping Hill maintain excellent standards in conditions that are working against them. They continue to provide an unbelievably caring and wonderful service. They are a credit to the NHS and to Stockport. They never complain or down tools because of the conditions; instead, they get on with the job.

My partner Lou and I sadly needed to spend time at Stepping Hill recently. Despite the awful reasons we were there, we felt protected, supported and cared for. I want to take this moment to say thank you to the staff for everything they did for us, for keeping us safe and for looking out for us. I promise here that I will always have their back and will never stop campaigning to get them the hospital they deserve.

So what is the solution? The Government announce bits of support every now and then, and they often announce the same pots of money time and again in the hope that it looks like support is there, but that does not help. We need a fully funded strategy for how Stepping Hill will be saved. There were plans for a new hospital in Stockport that were originally rejected by the previous Conservative Government. The plans would have enabled some relief for Stepping Hill and helped free up much-needed space on the estate. The plans also had backing from the trust and the council, which partnered to develop them, and the integrated care board. They pushed as much as they could. Sadly, it does not appear that the hon. Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra) supported them, but we will talk about that another time.

Whatever the solution, the fact is that action is now desperately needed. We cannot go on with more debates, more questions to Ministers and the Prime Minister, more letters to the Department of Health and Social Care and more meetings with officials—the Government have to act now. For over a decade the Conservative Government left Stepping Hill hospital to rot. This Government cannot do the same, and the Minister should not allow that to happen.

I want to end with a number of questions for the Minister. First, it is clear what help is needed and required, so why have the Government failed to act so far? Secondly, is it appropriate for 30 NHS staff members to share one toilet and that an NHS worker who uses a wheelchair has to go out in the rain to access the nearest accessible toilet? Thirdly, is it fair that patients at the end of their life cannot share their final moments with friends and family in privacy and with dignity? Finally, will the Minister come to Stepping Hill hospital along with the Prime Minister, who often talks about Stockport and the work he did there, so that they can see at first hand what happens when those in Westminster and Whitehall take our hospitals for granted?

--- Later in debate ---
Alison McGovern Portrait Alison McGovern
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I understand entirely the case that the hon. Lady makes. There will be further opportunities for the region to fund projects at Stepping Hill hospital through its estates safety fund allocation. As I mentioned in response to the hon. Member for Cheadle, I urge the trust to keep working closely and effectively with the ICB and the region, particularly as other funding streams are available. The trust has been allocated another £75 million in operational capital over the next four years.

Before I get too close to the end of my remarks, let me respond directly to the other questions asked by the hon. Member for Cheadle. He mentioned issues with toilets, which sound extremely worrying; from the Floor of the House, I urge local leaders to respond. I will make sure that he and Stockport Members receive a written response to those issues and to those related to end-of-life care. Members will understand the importance of end-of-life care and what a priority it is over the coming months and years for us all, so I will look into those issues.

Navendu Mishra Portrait Navendu Mishra
- Hansard - -

Although Stepping Hill hospital is in the constituency of the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr Morrison), it serves people from Hazel Grove, Cheadle and Stockport. May I reiterate the invitation from the hon. Member—I would go as far as calling him my good friend, even though we are in different parties—to the Health Secretary and any Ministers in the Department of Health and Social Care to visit Stockport and speak to volunteers, staff and patients there? Will the Minister pass on that message?

Alison McGovern Portrait Alison McGovern
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will certainly pass that message on. As the hon. Member for Cheadle mentioned, the current Prime Minister is no stranger to Stockport, so I am sure that I do not even need to let him know what is happening there.

We are already seeing some capital investment translate into better facilities for patients at Stepping Hill. The new urgent treatment centre is now open, with five additional consulting rooms increasing capacity, improving patient flow and helping to reduce avoidable pressure on the emergency department. That builds on the hospital’s emergency and urgent care campus, which fully opened in May 2025; that is part of the £639 million of planned capital investment to support NHS performance in the north-west.

Given what we have heard this evening, I cannot pretend that what has been done resolves every infrastructure challenge at Stepping Hill—it clearly does not. The pressures facing the hospital have built up over many years and will take time to address, but we are putting the local NHS on a much stronger footing to tackle them. The reforms set out in our capital plan mean that local leaders can look beyond immediate pressures, plan investment over multiple years and target funding towards the areas of greatest need and importance, and that really matters for Stepping Hill.

Members from the borough of Stockport have raised very important issues this evening—they are absolutely right to advocate for patients and staff, and I ask them to pass on my thanks to those staff. We do not underestimate the scale of the challenge, but we are delivering vital investment to address the most pressing risks at Stepping Hill while giving local NHS organisations greater certainty and flexibility to plan properly for the hospital’s long-term future. Without doubt, there is much more to do, but this is how we move away from short-term fixes and towards a safer, more resilient Stepping Hill hospital that can continue to serve the people of Stockport for many years to come.

Question put and agreed to.

Jeremy Hunt Portrait Sir Jeremy Hunt
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My right hon. Friend is speaking wisely. Of course, this is not just about massively improving care for patients—it is also about improving motivation for doctors and GPs, who are among the most demoralised groups in the NHS.

There is a GP surgery in Horfield, in the Bristol area, that kept the old GP list system, as 10% of surgeries have done. When I chaired the Health and Social Care Committee, I interviewed Dr Lee from that surgery and he said that because around 60% of the patients they see every day are their own patients, they do not have any problem with GP retention. The GPs who go to work there are happy, because they are seeing people they know. That would be transformative for morale inside general practice.

People might very reasonably say, “Well, you were in that job for rather a long time. Why didn’t you restore that system?”. I want to share a little secret with the House: I did actually try to do that. I changed the GP contract in 2015 so that every NHS patient in England has a named, accountable clinician. Unfortunately, I was outfoxed by the system. As a result of that change, on every electronic patient record, every one of us here will have a named accountable GP on the record. However, absolutely nothing else changed, and the NHS continued as it had done.

The Bill offers a real opportunity to transform care, as well as transforming life for GPs and patients. The same principle applies to maternity care. We know from inquiry after inquiry that despite reams of recommendations, things have not been getting better. If every mum was told at the moment she knew that she was pregnant, “This is the team who will be responsible for the safe delivery of your baby, in antenatal, birthing and post-natal,” we would restore the personal connection to maternity care. That is one of the biggest issues coming from so many mothers; they say that they feel anonymous in the system, and not listened to.

At its best, the NHS delivers absolutely incredible care—I have three wonderful children who exist because of amazing NHS care—but at its worst, it turns patients into numbers and human suffering into box-ticking. Lots of things are necessary to turn that around, but one of the biggest things is restoring continuity of care, so that every patient always knows who is the doctor responsible for their care. That is why I urge the Government to consider how to restore continuity of care in both general practice and maternity, if that is not going to be done through this Bill.

Navendu Mishra Portrait Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

There is lots in this Bill that is very positive, but I want to raise a couple of local issues, including one relating to my local Stepping Hill hospital. I thank the Minister for meeting me and my constituency neighbour, the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart), to discuss the hospital, because it is at the heart of healthcare provision in my town of Stockport. It serves around half a million patients per year and is one of the four specialist hub centres for emergency and higher-risk general surgery in Greater Manchester.

I appreciate that 14 years of austerity, imposed by the coalition Government of Liberal Democrats and Conservatives, and by subsequent Conservative Governments, have taken their toll on the NHS. The Labour Government have been trying to fix things over the last two years, but Stepping Hill hospital is a huge issue locally. I have mentioned the condition of the hospital a number of times in this Chamber, and a number of constituents frequently get in touch with me about the state of the hospital. At one point, Stepping Hill hospital was reported to be delivering only 51% of its usual outpatient services, which is simply not good enough. The staff do an amazing job, and an amazing set of volunteers support the hospital, but so much more needs to be done.

The backlog of repairs at the hospital is estimated to cost around £138 million. The Government have allocated £2.5 million for targeted essential repairs, fire safety and other works, and the foundation trust has been allocated £75 million by this Government over the next four years. That is a positive step, but I urge the Minister to go a bit further for Stepping Hill hospital in Stockport, Greater Manchester.

The second issue I want to raise is NHS-funded IVF treatment, which I have also mentioned previously. We live in a country where we have a postcode lottery in NHS funding for IVF treatment, and that should not be the case. I have signed new clause 104, tabled by the right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson), which is about ensuring that the provision of NHS-funded IVF is in line with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines.

Once again, a number of parents in my constituency have been in touch with me about this issue. Sadly, NHS Greater Manchester ICB has taken the step of reducing provision. It conducted a consultation a few months ago, and 74% of respondents either disagreed or completely disagreed with the proposed one-plus cycle offer. I have submitted a freedom of information request to NHS Greater Manchester ICB regarding the cost and resources that went into the consultation, because it did the consultation and then proceeded to reduce the provision. The change disproportionately impacts low-income women and people from poorer backgrounds, and that is simply not good enough. Greater Manchester has a population of almost 3 million people, and this is a regressive step.

The Government need to do a lot better on mandating legal access to NHS-funded IVF. Current data from a fertility unit in the north-east—one of the only two areas where an ICB funds three full rounds of IVF treatment—shows that the chance of a woman under 40 having a baby after three cycles of treatment is 70%, but the figure for people who get access to one cycle is just 46%. In England, we need standardisation of IVF treatment.

I also support new clause 108, tabled by my good and hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne). I will not say much on this point, because I have spoken on three separate occasions in Westminster Hall and in this Chamber about data hygiene and safety. I have had a very large volume of correspondence from constituents on this issue. Many people in Stockport are worried about foreign tech firms having access to their sensitive personal medical records. People need to have confidence that the personal details and data that they provide to the NHS will not be misused.

As I said earlier, this Government have achieved a lot in the last two years, but we need to recognise that there is so much more to be done. Labour Governments always fix things in the long run, but I ask the Minister specifically to go a bit further on Stepping Hill hospital and IVF.

Health Bill

Navendu Mishra Excerpts
2nd reading
Monday 1st June 2026

(5 months, 1 week ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Health Bill 2026-27 View all Health Bill 2026-27 Debates Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Navendu Mishra Portrait Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I declare my interest as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on cancer and the donations made by trade unions to my constituency Labour party.

I welcome a Bill to modernise the NHS, but our local hospital in Stockport, Stepping Hill, needs a lot of modernisation. The building is quite old and lots of problems have presented themselves over the years. I am grateful to the Minister for meeting me a few weeks ago to talk about Stepping Hill. The former Health Secretary and I had several conversations about the Stepping Hill estate. I urge the Government to work with me and other Stockport MPs on a long-term solution for Stepping Hill. I am very grateful to all the doctors, nurses and volunteers at Stepping Hill hospital.

I want to mention ICBs, as they feature quite a lot in the Bill. My experience of the Greater Manchester ICB has been quite poor. I thank the British Fertility Society and the charity The Fertility Alliance for all they have done on protecting access to in vitro fertilisation. I also thank in particular my local councillor Karl Wardlaw and his late wife Jodie, and place on record my gratitude to them for all the work they did on protecting access to IVF.

The Greater Manchester ICB consulted on levelling down the offer for NHS-funded IVF treatment across Greater Manchester to just one cycle in each borough, including Stockport; 74% of respondents completely disagreed or disagreed with that proposal. The ICB did the consultation—I am not sure how much time and money it wasted on it—but then proceeded with the levelling down offer of just one cycle of IVF. My experience of the ICB is therefore very poor.

Many constituents have written to me about their concerns about Palantir and access to their data. I know that Unison has also raised significant concerns about the damage done to public confidence by Government data initiatives and the use of organisations such as Palantir, the spy tech firm.

I have limited time. On a more positive note, as we are talking about the NHS, I am always keen to encourage more people to donate blood; I have been donating blood myself for almost 10 years. I place on record my thanks to everyone at the Plymouth Grove donor centre in Manchester. In particular, I thank Connor, Phil, Vivian and Dorcas, who always look after me. May I ask the Government to do more to promote blood donations?

I welcome the Government’s reforms to bring more democracy and accountability to the NHS, but we must ensure that health inequalities are addressed and reduced. In the richest part of my constituency, people can expect to live almost nine years longer than those who live in the most deprived part.

NHS Federated Data Platform

Navendu Mishra Excerpts
Thursday 16th April 2026

(6 months, 3 weeks ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster 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

Navendu Mishra Portrait Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dame Siobhain. I thank the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for securing the debate.

From links to serious human rights abuses to an ongoing lack of clarity around the security of sensitive patient data, a large number of my constituents have raised concerns about the ethical implications of using Palantir technology in our NHS. The hon. Member mentioned that a newspaper report in The Times on 9 April told us that the data chief of the NHS remains committed to the use of Palantir’s technology across the health service despite the company’s ties with ICE and the US military. I have written to the chief executive of Stockport NHS foundation trust as well as the Greater Manchester ICB on that issue.

Amnesty International and Medact, an organisation that brings together health workers in the UK, have been vocal in urging hospitals not to use Palantir software and have highlighted the link to some very concerning instances of human rights abuses.

Iqbal Mohamed Portrait Iqbal Mohamed
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will the hon. Member give way?

Navendu Mishra Portrait Navendu Mishra
- Hansard - -

I am limited for time and the hon. Member has already contributed, so I ask him to accept my apologies.

Patients must feel confident that their data is handled transparently, securely and in a way that reflects British values. That is why we should be investing in and developing our own sovereign technological capabilities here in Britain. I want to see Britain at the forefront of science and technology, and that starts with backing our own institutions. The UK has a proud heritage of education, with some of the finest universities and institutions in the world. We should be investing in them instead of relying heavily on foreign companies.

France has set a good example here. The French Government are moving all their desktops from Windows to Linux as part of a nationwide strategy to reduce reliance on US tech giants. We should take similar action in the UK. Retendering the federated data platform could benefit the country, addressing ethical and security concerns while also delivering long-term economic and technological benefits. I know the Minister is an NHS worker—a transplant surgeon—and on behalf of the people of Stockport, I thank him for the work that he does for the NHS. I know he will take seriously the point that it is not just the cost of the £330 million to the British taxpayer that cross-party Members here are concerned about; they are also concerned about their private, personal health data and the ethical behaviour of Palantir. I hope he will take the concerns raised today urgently back to the Government.

NHS 10-Year Plan

Navendu Mishra Excerpts
Thursday 3rd July 2025

(1 year, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wes Streeting Portrait Wes Streeting
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

We are so lucky to have my hon. Friend’s scientific expertise on our Benches, and we are also lucky that, despite being elected, she is doing research on behalf of the country in her spare time—goodness knows where she finds it. We welcome her public service. We need to see investment in new medicines and technology as an investment rather than a cost. That is how we deliver better care, better value for taxpayers and better outcomes, and it is how we close health inequalities. This is the most exciting revolution taking place in the world, and it is happening right here in England. We have got to make sure that the NHS benefits from it.

Navendu Mishra Portrait Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

This weekend will mark the 77th anniversary of the national health service, and I take this opportunity to thank all NHS staff at Stepping Hill hospital in Stockport. I pay tribute to the work of the British Dental Association, because week in, week out, Members from all parts of the House receive correspondence on NHS dentistry and the lack of it. I take this opportunity to invite the Secretary of State to visit Stockport. I know that he comes to Bury often, so when he is up in Greater Manchester, will he join me in Stockport to speak to patients, parents and frontline dental staff about the crisis?

Wes Streeting Portrait Wes Streeting
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend is right about the importance of dental services, and I hope that his constituents begin to feel the benefit. I also know he is leading the charge on the campaign for Stepping Hill hospital. He regularly raises it with me and other Ministers, and I would be delighted to try to visit his constituency as soon as my diary allows.

Parkinson’s Disease

Navendu Mishra Excerpts
Wednesday 21st May 2025

(1 year, 5 months ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster 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

Navendu Mishra Portrait Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

It is a pleasure to serve under you in this debate, Mr Stuart, and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) on securing this important debate. A family member of mine was diagnosed with Parkinson’s about two and a half to three years ago, so although I am not an expert on the issue, I understand how difficult it can be for family members, friends and the community. Unfortunately, my good friend from Yorkshire—my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley—has used up all my talking points, so I will keep my speech brief.

Many colleagues have pointed out that 153,000 people in the UK have Parkinson’s, but the figure predicted for 2030 will rise to 172,000. That is a significant increase in five short years, so we must do more to support people and medical practitioners in terms of Parkinson’s. This point has also been made but, sadly, the Parkinson’s workforce in the NHS has been facing a shortage for over 30 years. It has been neglected and the Government should address that urgently.

The Association of British Neurologists found that 1.1 full-time equivalent neurologists per 100,000 head of population were involved in patient care in the UK. If we compare that with France and Germany, the figure is one neurologist per—less than—25,000 head of population. The UK ranks 44th out of 45 European nations for the number of neurologists per head of population. That figure is simply not good enough.

The Parkinson’s UK programme, Parkinson’s Connect, has been mentioned, and I urge the Government to roll it out across the NHS in England to make sure that more people with the condition get the support they need. This Labour Government have made a decision to freeze prescription charges for 2025-26. I really welcome that, but unfortunately, Parkinson’s is not on the list of medical conditions that are exempt from prescription charges. My understanding is that that list was decided in 1968 and has barely changed since. Independent research suggests that scrapping prescription charges in England for Parkinson’s would save the NHS £93 per person per year, and reduce A&E visits by approximately 9%. I call on the Government to scrap prescription charges for people with Parkinson’s.

I will end on the blue badge scheme. Sadly, many people who suffer from Parkinson’s also suffer from a postcode lottery, where the local authority decides whether or not they will get a blue badge for their transport. A lot more research needs to be done on that. The Department for Transport and the Department of Health and Social Care should work together to ensure that people with Parkinson’s get the support that they need.