Debates between Neil O'Brien and Toby Perkins during the 2019-2024 Parliament

Mental Health Treatment and Support

Debate between Neil O'Brien and Toby Perkins
Wednesday 7th June 2023

(1 year, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Neil O'Brien Portrait Neil O’Brien
- Hansard - -

Those are not figures that I am familiar with or recognise, but I will certainly take this up with the London commissioners because it sounds like an important issue. I have talked about the dramatic increase we have already seen in the mental health workforce, and we are setting out further steps in our long-term workforce plan, but I will take that away and look at it closely with other Ministers.

Toby Perkins Portrait Mr Toby Perkins
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

One of the issues here is that the demand for mental health services has gone through the roof, from 3.6 million in 2020-21 to 4.5 million in 2021-22. My hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Dr Allin-Khan) was clear in her view, which I share, that the policies of this Government have been a factor in driving up the mental health demand. Does the Minister accept that? If not, what does he put it down to?

Neil O'Brien Portrait Neil O’Brien
- Hansard - -

I was just coming to that, but on the point about prevention and the social origins of these things, we are in agreement about tackling the origins of these things. In terms of financial security, that is why we are providing financial help worth £3,300 per household, one of the most dramatically generous packages anywhere in Europe. The question of good housing was raised earlier. We have the Social Housing (Regulation) Bill and we are taking action to extend the decent homes standard to the private rented sector.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Neil O'Brien and Toby Perkins
Tuesday 24th January 2023

(1 year, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Toby Perkins Portrait Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

11. If he will make an assessment of the adequacy of GP appointment availability in (a) Chesterfield constituency, (b) Derbyshire and (c) England.

Neil O'Brien Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Neil O’Brien)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

In November, there were 13.9% more appointments in general practice across England as a whole than in the same month before the pandemic. In Derby and Derbyshire, there were 16.6% more appointments. Our GPs are doing more than ever, and, compared with 2015-16, we are investing a fifth more in real terms. But we know that demand is unprecedented, and we are working to further support our hard-working GPs.

Toby Perkins Portrait Mr Perkins
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the Minister for that answer. We know that there are GP appointment difficulties everywhere, but we also know that it is much more difficult in more deprived communities. Social Market Foundation research shows that GPs in more deprived communities have twice as many patients on their books than those in more affluent areas. This means that, in addition to the greater health inequalities in those communities, people are finding it very difficult to get appointments, including at the Royal Primary Care practice in Staveley. Why should patients in more deprived communities be expected to tolerate far greater difficulties in getting GP appointments than those in more affluent areas?

Neil O'Brien Portrait Neil O’Brien
- View Speech - Hansard - -

In Derby and Derbyshire, for example, there are 495 more doctors and other patient-facing staff than in 2019. Step 1 is to have more clinicians, which we are doing through that investment. The hon. Member raises a point about Carr-Hill and the funding formula underlying general practice. There is actually heavy weighting for deprivation, and the point he raises is partly driven by the fact that older people tend not to live in the most deprived areas, and younger people tend to live in high IMD—index of multiple deprivation—areas. That is the reason for the statistic he used. Funding is rightly driven by health need, which is also heavily driven by age. We are looking at this issue, but the interpretation he is putting on it—that there is not a large weighting for deprivation—is not quite right.