(2 weeks, 1 day 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
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell.
Imagine being told that you have a progressive, incurable condition and then waiting over a year just to see a specialist. That is the reality for so many people with Parkinson’s and the number of people with Parkinson’s is set to double by 2050. When my constituent Carol was diagnosed with Parkinson’s in 2009, she was only 46 years old. Consultants told her then that they hoped a cure might come within a decade, but 16 years later there is nothing.
At this point, I must declare an interest. My daughter Molly is a PhD researcher with a brilliant team at the University of Southampton that is working to understand Parkinson’s, so that better treatments and cures can be found. As a member of the all-party parliamentary group on Parkinson’s, I know that great work is also happening elsewhere, particularly through the Brain Bank at Imperial College London. However, research alone is not enough; people living with Parkinson’s need care now.
Just before the general election last year, the current Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, then in his shadow role, admitted in the “Parky Politics in the Pub” podcast that there were not enough neurologists and committed to fix it. He said:
“We campaigned hard on workforce to get the last Government to commit to doubling the number of medical places so we can train up staff—especially in neurology, where we have shortages.”
He said he would deliver that workforce plan, yet today waiting times are unacceptably long—not just for initial appointments, but for ongoing care.
I pay tribute to the 459 constituents of mine who have signed this important petition. Does my hon. Friend agree that, as well as swift access to neurologists, access to specialist nurses is absolutely vital, as is having a named GP for long-term conditions such as Parkinson’s disease? One of my constituents who wrote to me said that her father has just had his medication changed and is having real problems with it, but he will not get to see anybody until March. We could reduce unplanned admissions by improving support.
Vikki Slade
I am so pleased that my hon. Friend has made that intervention, because I am just coming on to tell people about my constituent in Wimborne. He said that he, his brother and his nephew have all been diagnosed with Parkinson’s. When he was first diagnosed, he saw a Parkinson’s nurse every six months and then saw one annually. However, because there is now just one specialist Parkinson’s nurse covering my constituency, he has seen nobody for two years.
Karen, who is also from Wimborne, emailed me and said that she had an appointment with a neurologist and then one with a nurse, but now faces a 14-month wait for her next appointment. Across England, as we have heard, only half of patients meet the 18-week target, even though we know that early support—physiotherapy, speech therapy and clear information—keeps people healthy for longer.
If the Government are serious about transforming the NHS, they cannot allow people with progressive conditions who need a multidisciplinary approach to be forgotten. The NHS workforce plan is due in the spring. What assurance can the Minister give that neurology and Parkinson’s care in particular will feature strongly? It is great that the Government have expanded medical places, but what assessment has been made of how that will translate to neurology services? Given the training time required to generate such expertise, what is being done to bring consultants here from abroad to tackle the crisis now?
In my constituency, 333 people are living with Parkinson’s. On average, each one will be admitted to hospital at least once a year, two-thirds of them in an emergency, which will mean spending a week, unplanned, in an acute bed. That is simply not acceptable and we need to do better now.
(3 months ago)
Commons Chamber
Vikki Slade
My hon. Friend makes a very good point.
There is the opportunity to use more effectively our town and parish council system to drive community empowerment. Instead, the creation of neighbourhood committees feels like a top-down solution. Without statutory powers or budgets, they risk becoming symbolic rather than effective. While it is welcome that existing town and parish councils can participate, the Bill does not provide a framework for communities wanting to establish new councils or the funding to do so.
District councils have long underpinned the civic identity of towns and driven the activities that reflect their origins. With their loss in ancient towns and cities such as Colchester and Winchester, and without the funding to support smaller community-led councils, there is a real risk that our distinct history, culture and civic pride in our communities could be eroded. We cannot allow that to happen.
The Liberal Democrats welcome the replacement of the community right to bid with a right to buy with first refusal. I have seen some fantastic examples of the right to bid working, such as the Anchor Inn in Shapwick in my constituency, but these successes are few and far between.
Communities such as Teddington in my constituency will very much welcome the new community right to buy. At Udney Park, playing fields have lain derelict for more than a decade. However, although the Bill makes provision for what happens when there is a disagreement over price, it is silent on what happens when a community bid is refused by a buyer even at market valuation. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government must look to go further on that point?
Vikki Slade
I agree that there is opportunity to do much more as the Bill moves into Committee. Communities’ long struggles to save such assets is not because of a lack of passion or volunteers, but because the system feels stacked against them. “The Museum of Broken Dreams”, a display on the parliamentary estate, shows some good examples of where community groups have lost out to commercial developers who have demolished buildings and walked away, or where the groups cannot get support.
We are pleased to see sporting assets included in the right to buy and we welcome their indefinite inclusion on the register, but we want environmental assets to be included as well, so that we can protect our land for restoration and nature management. We also want restoration of the funding for neighbourhood plans, so that smaller authorities, which will now struggle to make such plans for their tiny communities, can do so without onerous costs to their residents.