Disability Equipment Provision

Seamus Logan Excerpts

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the provision of disability equipment.

I am grateful to the Speaker’s Office, which oversees the ballot that leads to the selection of debate topics. I am truly very pleased to have secured this debate to provide us all with the opportunity to shine a light on the issues that many people across the country are facing in accessing disability equipment.

I particularly welcome Milana Hadji-Touma, who is representing herself and a number of others today; I thank her for attending. I also thank the 653 people who have shared their experiences and provided moving testimonials, which have been invaluable in my preparation for this debate. I appreciate the time and energy that has gone into each response, and I reiterate my thanks and appreciation for all those who contributed.

I want to begin by offering some quotes from the responses, including some from my constituents:

“My daughter had to wait two years for her wheelchair.”

“I wouldn’t be able to function without my stairlift, my powered wheelchair and my crutches.”

“It is about my safety, my dignity and my ability to live independently.”

“I use a shower chair and a toilet frame which might seem small items but they have transformed my day to day safety and confidence.”

“With the correct equipment, I was able to complete a master's degree at a top university, become a teacher, learn to drive, hand cycle across eleven countries and live a full and rich life.”

Around 25% of the UK population are disabled, so access to disability equipment is essential. It alleviates everyday struggles and allows thousands of people to live safe and independent lives, which boosts personal confidence and mental wellbeing. Whether it is wheelchairs, living aids or home-adaptation items like grab rails, the devices offer numerous and powerful benefits, transforming lives so that the activities of daily life become more manageable, both for those dealing with disabling conditions and for those who provide care, including family members, friends and care workers.

Those benefits were echoed throughout my survey. One respondent stated:

“My disability equipment is my entire life”,

while another reported:

“It simplifies tasks, turns impossible activities into manageable ones with the right support, eases physical pain, reduces moments of embarrassment or vulnerability, and—most importantly—fosters greater independence and less dependence on others.”

Despite the benefits, 64% of respondents revealed that waiting times for disability equipment were longer than expected. As I said, one person reported that their daughter waited for a wheelchair for nearly two years, while one of my constituents highlighted the issues that arise from delayed equipment provision, stating:

“Without proper assessment and provision, disabled people can be left living in environments that actively worsen their health or place them at risk of injury.”

The testimonies I have shared show that there is a growing belief that the system to provide disability equipment is becoming increasingly unsustainable. With complaints about waiting times, quality of equipment and poor communication around access, it is no surprise that over 650 people responded to my survey in the space of four days. In addition, hundreds more people gave testimonies to inform the latest report from the all-party parliamentary group for access to disability equipment, published last October. Among stories of frustration and disappointment, the report revealed that 63% of carers and 55% of equipment users felt that services were getting worse.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for securing this important debate. I agree with absolutely everything he has said. He talks about the problem with access to equipment; I know of one case, which is representative of many that come across my desk, that concerns the inability to hand back equipment after use. A constituent contacted me whose mother had died after two years of home care. She had a hospital bed, three commodes, an orthopaedic chair and a walking frame. The NHS provider had gone into receivership and there was no method whatsoever for her to hand back the equipment. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we are compounding the problems for people getting equipment by not reusing the stuff that is already out there?

[Seamus Logan]

I do agree. Indeed, that problem causes a massive cost to the taxpayer as well.

It is no surprise that 74% of equipment providers were aware of patients experiencing delayed hospital discharge due to unavailable community equipment. The APPG’s report recommended and called for the implementation of a national strategy to ensure the cohesive and comprehensive delivery, monitoring and financing of disability equipment.

Complaints about the current system and provision of equipment have been reported by various other organisations, including the UK charity for young wheelchair users, Whizz Kidz, which described wheelchair services as “underfunded, inaccessible, and fractured.” In June 2025, it was reported that Citizens Advice receives a new complaint about faulty aids every hour.

My own pedigree in this area goes back many years—in fact, to 1996, when I first joined a health and personal social services commissioning organisation, under the leadership of my great friends Mary Wilmont and Kevin Keenan, both former directors of social services in Northern Ireland. We examined in great detail the wheelchair services for people who were deaf or blind, hard of hearing or visually impaired. One report stands out in my memory—not because I authored it, but because it was a simple idea to address the challenges facing people in getting to a hospital appointment. We called it “Getting There”. That was 30 years ago.

Although this Government need to “get there”, the challenges in the existing system are more profound. In England and Wales, the provision of equipment is currently run by the NHS and local authorities, which are primarily responsible for facilitating care needs assessments and subsequently approving and providing equipment. As a result, available equipment, the length of waiting times and the quality of adaptations are increasingly becoming a postcode lottery.

[Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)]

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the patchwork system to which he referred is, through delay and dysfunction, denying many disabled people the independence they deserve? A 56-year-old constituent of mine in Somerset with a progressive muscle wasting condition has been left effectively housebound and in severe pain for months while trying to obtain essential wheelchair adaptations. May I appeal to the Minister’s extensive good will and ask him to look at that case?

[Seamus Logan]

I agree with the hon. Member, and that highlights the need for a national strategy and a review of the current organisational arrangements.

Age UK has noted that, due to a lack of national guidelines on timelines, long waiting lists are common, partly due to shortages in that noble profession, occupational therapists. To mitigate the situation, multiple organisations have been set up with the sole purpose of supporting those in need of disability equipment in the face of a failing system. They include Back Up, a UK-wide charity that works with people affected by spinal cord injury and provides vital wheelchair skills training. The Motability Foundation has awarded £36.4 million in grants to customers of its Motability scheme to help them access adequate and good-quality equipment, as many people have resorted to self-funding permanent or temporary equipment. The foundation has also conducted an economic assessment of wheelchair provision in England and recommended that greater integration across services is needed to prevent variation in the quality of provision.

In Scotland, the handling of disability equipment and adaptations is carried out by integrated authorities—united bodies in which local authorities and NHS services work together to provide more cohesive and community-focused health and social care planning. To guide those bodies, the Scottish Government agreed a memorandum of understanding some years ago, setting out a standardised approach for the provision of equipment to maintain consistency across all local councils. During engagement with voluntary organisations in this field, I was told that the Scottish approach is paying dividends. I recommend to the Minister that a similar approach should be considered for implementation in England and Wales, because the system needs change now.

Thousands of people across the UK are sick, sore and tired of being unheard after countless complaints. When will their voices be taken seriously? Greater national leadership is urgently needed to put an end to the insecure and uncertain system in which someone’s ability to obtain necessary life-supporting equipment is based on where they live rather than their need. Everyone has a right to access disability equipment and live a safe and independent life. The pressure is on the UK Government to step up and redesign the system, and respond to the many calls to establish a national strategy.

A consolidated approach holds the potential to improve oversight, reduce waiting times and ensure consistent and reliable access to disability equipment for everyone, no matter where they might live, so let me pose just one simple question to the Minister: in responding to the debate, will he please set out the reasons why he would not agree to take forward a national strategy in this area?

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Seamus Logan]

The breadth of the debate today has demonstrated that an hour is simply not enough to deal with this topic. As the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) said, housing and domestic adaptations are a topic all on their own, as is access to work under the DWP. There is also transport to consider; we could have spoken about transport issues for hours.

I am disappointed by the number of Members present for the debate, but of course it has been a very busy day so it is perfectly understandable. However, I encourage colleagues who are present, especially the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings, to try to raise this topic with the Backbench Business Committee so that we can get this whole discussion into the main Chamber in future.

I particularly thank the chair of the APPG, the hon. Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis), as well as all Members who have contributed to the debate today, especially the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire), the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans), and the Minister himself. It has been a very busy day for the Government—even a difficult day, at times—so I appreciate his time and the passion with which he spoke about this topic. He genuinely wants to see improvement in this area. If the July 2025 new plan for disability can bring forward a framework, strategy or improvement, we would all very much endorse that.

Finally, I thank the Chamber engagement team. We sometimes take them for granted, but they are responsible for helping parliamentarians such as myself to bring informed debates to the main Chamber and Westminster Hall. I thank them very sincerely. With that, I will close.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the provision of disability equipment.

Type 1 Diabetes: Infant Testing

Seamus Logan Excerpts

Monday 9th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I thank the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for opening this important debate, and I pay tribute to the members of the public present, who no doubt represent thousands of people online tonight.

The Lyla’s law campaign is a powerful reminder of the devastating consequences of missed or delayed diagnosis for type 1 diabetes in children and young people. It calls for improved education and guaranteed routine testing for children showing early symptoms before they reach diabetic ketoacidosis, which is a life-threatening condition that requires emergency hospital care. Many families and parents learn about their children’s condition only once they have reached this potentially fatal stage. Not only is that traumatic and dangerous, putting a child’s life at risk, but it creates avoidable costs and puts strain on emergency healthcare services. Families should not have to wait for those serious complications to occur for a diagnosis to be made.

Despite this, the UK Government claim that there is still “insufficient evidence” to support routine mandatory testing for type 1 diabetes in babies, toddlers and young children. That is why the petition is so important. It calls for existing NHS guidance, which recommends the immediate testing of children and young people showing symptoms of type 1 diabetes—the fours Ts, which have been mentioned—to be formally legislated for. Current guidance alone is clearly not enough, and a standardised approach for all GPs and doctors is urgently needed.

A member of the Insulin Pump Awareness Group in Scotland recently wrote to me mentioning that they often wonder whether their own diagnosis 29 years ago would have been picked up had they not been made aware of the four Ts symptoms through family.

[Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)]

My West Dunbartonshire constituent Janice shared with me the very personal story of her daughter, who three years ago became so unwell that she was admitted to hospital. She was desperately ill, but she survived. The signs had been there, but they were missed, with the diagnosis coming at the very last moment, in an emergency setting. Will the hon. Member join me in commending the work of Diabetes Scotland and its efforts to improve testing, screening and early diagnosis in Scotland?

[Seamus Logan]

I completely agree with the hon. Member and endorse his suggestion.

This topic is personally important to me, not only because so many family members have been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes but—as the hon. Member for Edinburgh North and Leith (Tracy Gilbert) referred to—because of the premature death in 2022 of my nephew Nick Logan from complications arising from his original diagnosis at the age of 16.

Italy made history in 2023 by becoming the first country to introduce nationwide screening for the early detection of type 1 diabetes in children. In 2021, Scotland also led the way by being the first country to offer C-peptide blood tests to everyone with diabetes to address misdiagnosis. Although that may not be the same as a routine screening programme for type 1 diabetes, it demonstrates how routine testing can be implemented.

Childhood type 1 diabetes rates in the UK are among the highest in the world, ranking fifth globally for children aged 14 and under, according to the International Diabetes Federation. In conclusion, it is essential that the UK Government take a more targeted and strategic approach to improving the care and diagnosis of children and young people showing type 1 diabetes symptoms. That starts with the implementation of routine testing—

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke (in the Chair)]

Order.

Hughes Report: Second Anniversary

Seamus Logan Excerpts

Wednesday 11th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham (Sarah Green) for securing the debate.

On behalf of constituents who have written to me, I want to begin by quoting the comments of the Patient Safety Commissioner for England, Professor Hughes, to the BBC when her report was released two years ago:

“These families weren’t listened to by a system that really turned its back, and fobbed them off with information which led to them not only being harmed, but thousands of others being harmed.”

The Hughes report has still not received a proper response—from either the Conservative Government or current Labour Government—and that is the key. That is deeply disappointing and a massive let-down for all those women and children affected by this scandal. I appreciate that this is an important issue, and it warrants due process, but there has been a two-year wait for a response, not to mention that the wait for the families affected has been so much longer.

Although the Patient Safety Commissioner’s remit extends to England only, this is a UK-wide issue. The regulation of human medicines and medicinal products is reserved. The report said that the Department of Health and Social Care should

“engage with the devolved governments”

on where and how the two-stage redress approach should apply across the UK. The UK Government have indicated that those conversations are taking place. That is encouraging, and I hope that it continues, but we in Scotland have been disappointed by this Government more than once. The well-worn saying applies: justice delayed is justice denied.

This Government promised change, and here is a case in point. The unreserved apology offered by the previous Government in July 2021 was welcome, as was the invitation in December 2022

“to look at what a potential redress scheme could look like.”—[Official Report, 7 December 2022; Vol. 724, c. 478.]

But that was more than three years ago. Of course, this Government rightly deserve praise for acting to redress the problem and offer compensation, albeit slowly in some cases, following the infected blood scandal and the Post Office Horizon scandal. Please do not add this situation to that of the Women Against State Pension Inequality Campaign, the nuclear test veterans and others, where successive Governments have taken a negligent approach.

In summary, I am speaking up primarily on behalf of my constituents. We need urgent action on this report and a proper system of redress for the countless families affected by this scandal. Please let us get on with addressing recommendation 4 of the Hughes report without delay. I hope the Minister will address that in her response.

--- Later in debate ---

[Karin Smyth]

I will give way first to the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East.

[Seamus Logan]

I appreciate the complexities of the steps that the Minister is outlining. Nevertheless, in repeated contributions, Members have asked for a timescale, so will the Minister respond by the end of the Session? Will she respond by the autumn? Will she respond by the end of the calendar year? Can she give us some clarification, please?

[Karin Smyth]

I am happy to answer that at the end of my comments, but first I will take the intervention from the right hon. Member for New Forest East.

Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill

Seamus Logan Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 27th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Wes Streeting]

That is right. I have to say, many of my counterparts around the world cannot fathom how we ended up in this situation in the first place. They certainly do not do as we have been doing, investing so much in their home-grown talent only to then see that talent compete on equal terms with anyone from anywhere else in the world.

Let me set out why we need this Bill. There are workforce problems that only Government can solve. We know that the treatment of resident doctors has been totally unacceptable for years and we see the training bottlenecks that resident doctors face today. In 2019, there were around 12,000 applicants for 9,000 specialty training places. This year, that has soared to nearly 40,000 applicants for 10,000 places, with nearly twice as many overseas-trained applicants as UK-trained ones. As a result, we now have the ridiculous state of affairs where UK medical graduates, whose training British taxpayers fund to the tune of £4 billion a year and who want to carve out a career in their NHS, are either being lost abroad or to the private sector. If we do not deal with that, the scale of the issue and the resentment it causes will just get worse. More taxpayers’ money will be wasted, more British medics will turn their backs on the NHS, and patients and our NHS will ultimately suffer.

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

The Secretary of State knows that the SNP believes that this is a pragmatic Bill that will have a net-positive outcome for the health service in Scotland. We welcome the Bill and are glad to support it. However, there are specialty fields, such as general practice, which have a high number of international graduates. Because of Government policy, there are significant challenges in supporting the retention of some individuals. For example, the new requirement for settled status is 10 years with some exceptions, whereas training programmes are often only three years long. I am sure that the Secretary of State does not want the UK to be a hostile environment for our vital overseas medical staff. Will he therefore make representations to the Home Office so that it is aware of the anomaly?

[Wes Streeting]

I will say two things to the hon. Gentleman. This Bill does not in any way detract from the fundamental point that the NHS has always been an overseas recruiter and we have always been fortunate to draw on global talent from around the world who come and give through their service, their taxes and their wider contribution to the national health service and our country. We will continue to welcome that and people will continue to be free to apply. In future, they will apply on terms that are fairer to our own, home-grown talent.

There is nothing in what the Home Secretary proposes that will stop people who come through our universities and have the skills that we need to contribute to our health and care system applying for jobs and settling and making the UK their home. The Bill supports the Home Secretary to reduce an over-reliance on overseas talent and labour, which contributes to levels of net migration that even bleeding-heart liberals like me can see are too high. That is the issue that the Home Secretary seeks to deal with.

Oral Answers to Questions

Seamus Logan Excerpts

Tuesday 13th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Wes Streeting]

My hon. Friend can be absolutely assured of that. I thank her for her powerful advocacy in this place, as well as for putting her words into action on the NHS frontline. She does not need to do that—she could do the bare minimum to keep her licence going—but she always goes above and beyond to take care of patients and constituents, literally rolling up her sleeves and putting on her scrubs to do that. She has made a number of thoughtful recommendations in her report, and I look forward to engaging with her and the all-party group on that.

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

I genuinely welcome the fact that the Secretary of State is able to praise the efforts of NHS staff this Christmas and new year, but there is good news in Scotland, too: waiting lists have fallen for the longest waiters for the sixth month in a row and threatened industrial action by resident doctors has been called off. However, there is anxiety not just in Scotland but across these islands about the new UK-US medicines deal and its impact on the NHS. Will the Secretary of State change his habit this new year with a new year’s resolution and answer my question? Where is the money coming from for the UK-US drugs deal?

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The question is about waiting lists, and I am sorry but we have got to stick to it. [Interruption.] Order. Mr Logan, I was very good in bringing you in, especially with health being devolved, so please let us not change the question before us. Helen Morgan will be a good example.

Oral Answers to Questions

Seamus Logan Excerpts

Tuesday 25th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Wes Streeting]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right about the need to improve the quality of the paediatric workforce. We are considering that as we revise the workforce plan. I am proud that already, with just one decision that we took in the first year of this Labour Government to expand free school meals, we are lifting 100,000 more children out of the poverty they were left in by the Opposition.

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

In 2024-25, the NHS trust in the Secretary of State’s constituency collected £2.4 million from patient and visitor parking and a further £1 million from staff parking. Given that those costs fall hardest on the poor and the most seriously ill, will the Secretary of State consider abolishing this inequitable burden on the sick, their relatives and those who care for them?

[Wes Streeting]

If I were the hon. Gentleman, I would be more worried about the situation close to home and the SNP’s abysmal record of failure: while waiting lists are falling in Labour-led England and Labour-led Wales, in SNP-led Scotland they are rising, despite the biggest funding settlement since devolution began. It is a record that should make him and his party blush.

Oral Answers to Questions

Seamus Logan Excerpts

Tuesday 21st October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dr Ahmed]

I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this crucial issue to light. Early access to high-quality support is critical for young people struggling with their mental health. That is backed by us with an extra £688 million this year. We are hiring more staff, expanding support teams in schools and boosting support in new Young Futures hubs so that children can get the best possible start in life. Although initially not focused on CAMHS, the scope of the NHS online hospital is a personal priority for the Prime Minister and has the capacity to grow, and we will consider incorporating it when safely able to alongside other services.

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

Whatever the impact of these new online services, the Opposition Front-Bench team have drawn attention to the fact that waiting lists in England have risen for the last three months. I can inform the House this morning that waiting lists in Scotland are coming down. Would the Minister like to explain why that is the case?

[Dr Ahmed]

I am so glad the hon. Gentleman took the time to ask that question, because while we invest in digital services, Scotland and Scottish patients are still waiting for the most basic digital infrastructure. While we invest record amounts in Scotland’s budget, the SNP’s excuses keep rising. What he needs to answer is why Scottish patients are living in a digital desert, while patients here in England are getting more and more sophisticated NHS digital services.

NHS 10-Year Plan

Seamus Logan Excerpts

Thursday 3rd July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Wes Streeting]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question; he is such a strong voice for the people of Gloucester. We are already delivering improvements in general practice, with 1,900 more GPs employed on the frontline, £900 million more for general practice, and the first contract agreed with GPs for quite some years. We are working in genuine partnership with GPs, who will be at the centre of the neighbourhood health service and of neighbourhood health centres. I am determined to ensure that we do things with our friends in general practice, not to them. Where things are working, I have no interest in going in like a bull in a china shop and imposing top-down change unnecessarily; we learned that lesson from Lord Lansley. I am confident that we have a plan that GPs will relish and embrace, and that they will feel reassured that the future of general practice is bright. After years of campaigning for a Government to rebuild general practice, they finally have a Government who are on their side.

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement on his plan. I note the comments on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, but the Scottish Medicines Consortium is the envy of the other three nations. I would like to offer him an early win. There is a drug, Enhertu, for the treatment of women with secondary breast cancer; it prolongs life. It is available in Scotland and in 20 other nations. Will he review the situation in England under this plan?

[Wes Streeting]

We work closely with NICE to make sure that we consider, in an evidence-based way, the case for prescribing new medicines. We want patients to have access to the latest treatments and technology, and we work with the pharmaceutical industry to get as many medicines as possible to patients. We definitely need growth in this area.

I have a counter-offer for the hon. Gentleman. I notice that the Scottish Government are now on their fifth health plan; none of the others has worked. We are always willing to help, and I will put a copy of the plan in the post to my Scottish counterpart, but I will not hold out much hope. In England and Wales, where a Labour Government are in place, waiting lists are falling; in Scotland, waiting lists are rising, and we have heard astonishing admissions of failure from Ministers whose party has been in power for almost 20 years. It is very clear: Scotland needs an alternative. Scotland’s NHS needs an alternative: Scottish Labour.

Department of Health and Social Care

Seamus Logan Excerpts

Tuesday 24th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

I rise to set the record straight in Scotland when it comes to the much-vaunted but false largesse of this spin-doctoring Labour Government.

After the autumn statement, the Government spent much time and energy telling the Scottish people how generous they were—the largest settlement in the history of devolution, they said. However, what they did not tell the people of Scotland was that when their inflationary policies were taken into account, driven by their eye-watering borrowing—when we consider pay and prices rises and the punitive employer national insurance increases —the settlement that looked big in cash terms was not so big in real terms. If Scottish Labour Members would spend as much time dealing with the things they were elected to deal with as they spend attacking the Holyrood Government, they might locate the spine that some Labour Back Benchers seem to have found recently in regard to the welfare Bill.

Turning to the estimates, under the Barnett formula, Scotland’s taxpayers depend on the generosity of the Westminster Treasury, even though it is our money—and do not give me the usual nonsense about higher per capita spend. If the Treasury did its sums correctly to include all our produce, if our needs were properly calculated and our geographic size and rurality compared to our population and demography accounted for, the numbers would be very different.

The results of the spending review and these estimates are not good. The UK Government’s spin on the spending review was so misleading that the independent and well-respected Fraser of Allander Institute said, “We have seen Labour MPs and MSPs describing the spending review event as increasing the block grant by £9.1 billion over the spending review period, but this is a figure that is neither transparent nor helpful”—not my words but those of the institute. Its conclusion, based on the Scottish Fiscal Commission’s forecast, is that rather than representing a £9.1 billion uplift, Labour’s spending review actually brought in a £700 million cut to Scotland’s funding against May’s central estimate.

Our health service depends not only on our excellent NHS workers but on our infrastructure. That is why it is so disappointing that in the spending review the UK Government imposed a real-terms cut on Scotland’s capital spending in the latter half of the spending review period. In effect, Scotland has been short-changed by more than a billion pounds.

Despite Labour’s continuing austerity in Scotland, the Scottish Government is investing heavily in our health service. Over the past year there has been a significant fall in long waits and an increased amount of GP appointments and surgical procedures—for example, there has been a 50% increase in hip and knee replacements. The SNP will continue to fight for our NHS and against successive Westminster Governments who do not have Scotland’s interests at heart.

Oral Answers to Questions

Seamus Logan Excerpts

Tuesday 17th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Wes Streeting]

I can reassure the hon. Member that end-of-life care is featured in the 10-year plan for health. I also recognise the pressure on our hospice sector, which is why this Government, as well as delivering £26 million through the children’s hospice grant, committed £100 million of capital investment— the biggest in a generation for our hospices. None the less, hospices do rely on the generosity of donors and I am keen to work in partnership with the sector to look at what more we can do to encourage investment. The final thing I would say is that the Opposition parties welcomed the investment in the national health service while opposing the means of raising it. They cannot have it both ways; either they support the investment and the revenue raisers or they have to be honest with the public that they would be cutting the NHS.

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

One of the most egregious examples of waste in recent years was the almost £10 billion spent on useless personal protective equipment during the pandemic. When the Treasury eventually recovers some of that money, will the Secretary of State assure me that Scottish taxpayers will benefit in the usual way through the usual channels?

[Wes Streeting]

Fiscal decisions and spending are matters for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor, but let me reassure the hon. Gentleman of two things. First, the way in which the taxpayers of this country were ripped off during a national emergency was a total disgrace, and this Government are determined to get our money back and reinvest it in frontline services, where it should always have been. Secondly, I can reassure him that, so long as there is a Labour Government here in Westminster, Scotland will continue to benefit from the investment it needs to sort out its public services. Now it just needs a Labour Government in Scotland to spend that money wisely.