Neuropsychiatric Conditions: PANS and PANDAS

Wendy Chamberlain Excerpts

Thursday 25th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the diagnosis and treatment of Paediatric Acute-onset Neuropsychiatric Syndrome (PANS) and Paediatric Autoimmune Neuropsychiatric Disorders Associated with Streptococcal Infections (PANDAS).

It is a pleasure to open this debate, and I am grateful to colleagues who have attended, despite the immense heat. I welcome the members of the PANS PANDAS UK youth board, and the families impacted by these conditions who are here to watch the debate from the Gallery, and I am grateful to the Doorkeepers for their accommodation in that regard. The heat has meant that many families who were planning to attend, as well as the PANS PANDA UK team, have not been able to travel down, and I know how understandably disappointed they are, but I am pleased to still have the opportunity to speak about this condition on behalf of the thousands of children, young people and families who want to know that their voices are being heard.

PANS, which stands for paediatric acute-onset neuropsychiatric syndrome, and PANDAS, which stands for paediatric autoimmune neuropsychiatric disorders associated with streptococcal infections—you can understand why we say PANS and PANDAS—are post-infectious conditions that affect the brain. They are recognised by NHS England as clinical syndromes.

PANS is a condition in children and young people that can result from an initial mild infection, such as chickenpox or even covid. PANDAS is a specific sort of PANS that stems from a strep infection. While the initial infections might be mild, in some cases they trigger a misdirected immune response and/or a brain inflammation that causes the rapid onset of severe symptoms. I want to emphasise that rapidness; children can go from being healthy and thriving to experiencing obsessive compulsive behaviours, tics, extreme anxiety, eating restrictions and profound neurological symptoms almost overnight.

PANS PANDAS UK currently supports around 8,000 families, but we know that that number is likely to be just the tip of the iceberg. In reality, there are likely to be children and families affected in every one of our constituencies. Looking at Members in the Chamber today, I am sure that many have been contacted by a constituent who is struggling to get support for their children. Constituents get in touch with their Member of Parliament, and that is often why we become engaged in these issues. That was the case for me. I first became aware of PANS and PANDAS when constituents reached out to me for support for their daughter, who was struggling to get a diagnosis and the medication that she needed.

I want to emphasise the key point that early diagnosis and treatment are crucial. When the conditions are identified early, outcomes are significantly better, and in some cases a simple course of antibiotics can alleviate symptoms. However, people are very much experiencing the opposite to that. They are experiencing delay, confusion and inconsistency. Research from PANS PANDAS UK suggests that over 53% of affected families wait more than a year for diagnosis, and 37% wait for more than two years.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank the hon. Lady for bringing this important issue to the House. The Government are introducing guidelines on this in the autumn. Does she welcome the publication of those guidelines, and does she hope that they will get rid of the inconsistencies and postcode lottery that she is describing?

[Wendy Chamberlain]

As always, the hon. Gentleman is ahead of the game; I was going to mention this. I am very much looking forward to the guidance, but we need to ensure that it is understood and shared.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

The hon. Lady mentioned the all-important fact that early diagnosis, coupled with the prescribing of a quite common antibiotic —I believe amoxicillin is one of them—can make a crucial difference. In May last year, I asked in a written question whether the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care would take steps to facilitate the circulation of material to general practitioners, advising them on how to recognise PANS and PANDAS, and treat them with antibiotics and anti-inflammatory medications. The response that I got from the Minister for Care was that this is all a matter for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, which is an independent body. The Minister said that NICE has

“no plans to issue guidance on paediatric acute-onset neuropsychiatric syndrome (PANS) and paediatric autoimmune neuropsychiatric disorder associated with streptococcus (PANDAS)”.

He also said,

“should the evidence base develop further, we would look to the NICE to update clinical policy.”

It seems that the early use of antibiotics is not yet accepted by the medical establishment. Does the hon. Lady know whether there is hard evidence to show that the medical establishment needs to get its act together on the matter?

[Wendy Chamberlain]

The right hon. Member may recall the debate we had in a previous Parliament on this subject. The Minister at the time gave the commitment that she would ensure that GPs and other medical practitioners were aware of the guidance that PANS PANDAS UK was producing. I hope we will hear today that the Minister is looking at that. There is clearly a challenge, and although the condition is recognised by the World Health Organisation and by NHS England, there is more to do to minimise the postcode lottery and ensure that we can get support for young people.

[Sir Julian Lewis]

I am sorry if I did not express myself clearly enough. It is not so much a question of the non-recognition of PANS and PANDAS, but whether it has been recognised that early treatment with antibiotics can make all the difference.

[Wendy Chamberlain]

I am sure the Minister can address that in her closing remarks. We absolutely need to ensure that. As the right hon. Member has said, amoxicillin might be one of the antibiotics that could be used. It is straightforward to use, and in the vast majority of cases it works, but if it does not, potentially PANS and PANDAS could be ruled out.

Too many families face rejected referrals, long waits and, in some cases, misdiagnosis. Only a small proportion of cases are diagnosed within the NHS, and many people are forced to travel long distances or turn to private care. That is not possible for all families; getting the private care needed for their child can bring families to their knees. To give an example from my constituency, in the same GP practice, one GP will provide support and the other does not recognise the condition. That makes things very difficult.

A number of families whom I have engaged with have had to seek private support, and that makes me ask—I hope the Minister is sympathetic to this—what about the children from families who are reliant on NHS support, and do not get the diagnosis? They may be absent from school for long periods. Their family may be written off as problematic, and the children as having problematic behaviours, when ultimately the condition could be at the root of the problem. From the point of view of our ongoing economic wellbeing, we need to support children’s being in education as much as we can. That is why the research is so important—because we need to ensure that families can get the support that they need, no matter their financial situation.

A National Institute for Health and Care Research-funded evidence synthesis is under way; that has changed since the last time this topic was debated. It is already highlighting significant gaps in our understanding, particularly around effective treatments. Also, with other members of the all-party parliamentary group on PANS PANDAS, which I chair, we met doctors some time ago who are researching how the brain functions. Their work suggests that there may be biomarkers that indicate a higher likelihood of developing the conditions, and they have produced fascinating research that I encourage colleagues to read. We need to understand how severe the impact of PANS and PANDAS can be on a child. It is clear that further research is urgently needed to aid both diagnosis and treatment, which often needs to be ongoing.

Awareness and training are fundamental. Without them, as has been mentioned, healthcare professionals miss the signs, and teachers misinterpret symptoms. Children who experience sudden neurological decline are too often viewed through the lens of behaviour, anxiety or neurodivergence, rather than as having a medical emergency. From the children that I have engaged with through the youth board, I have learned that it is a terrifying experience for a young person to deal with those symptoms.

I am pleased to say, however, that we are at an important turning point. The UK clinical guidance, which the hon. Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) mentioned, is expected later this year, and there has been significant work since the last debate, which I held in September 2023, to bring PANS and PANDAS further into the policy landscape. I pay tribute to PANS PANDAS UK for that, because the charity has been the key driver in making that happen. Guidance alone will not be enough, however; it must be consistently embedded across the NHS, so that we end the postcode lottery in diagnosis and care. I suspect that we will hear about some of that from other Members. The consequences are profound; the human cost of delay and misdiagnosis is devastating. Children lose the ability to attend school, lose previously secure skills, and experience severe psychiatric and physical symptoms.

Just a few months ago, I hosted a roundtable in Parliament, at which the PANS PANDAS UK youth board members were able to speak directly to MPs about their experiences. As MPs, we engage with parents in the first instance, but it was very powerful to hear directly from children who are experiencing the condition. They might not be in the Gallery, but many of them will be voting; as we were informed, they are the voters of the future and are paying attention to what we do right now. It was an eye-opening session, particularly for those who had not heard of the condition. The children spoke about wanting to be believed and understood, and wanting to get help more quickly. Their message was clear: earlier recognition could change everything. They explained how PANS and PANDAS have impacted their lives; they described watching their peers progress, while they feel stuck behind, and being too unwell to attend school and so having to repeat years. That adds to a feeling of isolation. We can all remember when we were younger and times when childhood was quite cruel.

Families have described watching their child disappear in front of them. Parents leave work to provide care: 36% report having to stop working entirely, and many families face financial losses as a result, as well as from seeking private care. At the youth board roundtable, we also heard from the siblings of children diagnosed with PANS and PANDAS—I believe that my hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) has a constituent in Parliament this afternoon who is part of the sibling community. It was a stark reminder of how these conditions impact entire family units; there is the financial impact of having to seek healthcare, and of a parent leaving their job, and the impact of home becoming an unstable and unpredictable environment.

The conditions also have a devastating effect on learning. Nearly half of affected children miss more than six months of school, and over a third miss more than a year. They often experience the sudden loss of core learning skills. Under the current system in England, which is designed to support gradual, stable learning needs, rather than acute onset, as well as under aspects of the proposed special educational needs and disabilities reforms, there is a real risk that those children are misunderstood. Without clear guidance, education professionals default to familiar frameworks. A sudden loss of skills can be misinterpreted as a behavioural issue or neurodivergence, leading to inappropriate support and a delay in the medical intervention required. That is why the alignment between health, education and local authorities is so critical.

I obviously speak as a Scottish MP. We must ensure alignment across the UK, so that there is no postcode lottery in the level of support available. My Scottish Liberal Democrat colleague Adam Harley, the new MSP for Strathkelvin and Bearsden, recently raised a constituent’s case in the Scottish Parliament; I was particularly disappointed in the response of First Minister John Swinney, who referred to PANS/PANDAS as a “rare disease”. It was clear that he knew nothing about it. Despite my own correspondence with his Government, we have seen limited progress in Scotland. I must emphasise that it is not a potentially rare disease; it is an undiagnosed one. I genuinely believe many children with PANS/ PANDAS have not been diagnosed and are therefore not getting the support they need. That underlines the need for close engagement with devolved Governments to ensure a truly joined-up approach to improving support.

Today’s debate will largely focus on children and young people with PANS/PANDAS, but it is equally important to recognise the challenges faced by adults. One adult with PANS/PANDAS shared with me that she has experienced mostly neuropsychiatric symptoms, rather than physical ones. Research shows that PANS and PANDAS can be associated with systemic inflammation and autoimmune responses affecting the whole body, including conditions such as arthritis and other inflammatory diseases. In that person’s case, tests revealed ongoing systemic inflammation that has damaged tissues and organs over time, as the immune system mistakenly attacks healthy cells, rather than protecting them. Too often, the symptoms that PANS/PANDAS can manifest are put in the “too difficult to deal with” basket.

These are the practical steps that we are asking the Government to consider. First, when the UK clinical guidance is published later this year, there must be a clear commitment that steps will be taken to ensure that it is embedded consistently across the NHS, not left to chance, and that appropriate stakeholders are engaged to support its dissemination.

Secondly, we need training for healthcare professionals and those working in education, so that symptoms are recognised early and acted on appropriately. Thirdly, we must have a renewed commitment to research funding, building on the work of the National Institute for Health and Care Research, to address the significant gaps in evidence and improve treatment pathways. I ran the London marathon—my first ever—at the end of April, and one of the charities I was fundraising for was PANS PANDAS UK. It should not take fundraising to deliver the funds that are needed for the research that will provide the right support for these children.

Finally, there must be clear signposting and alignment with the forthcoming local authority guidance to ensure that schools and services are equipped to meet their legal duties. As one clinical psychologist working with a young person with PANS has stated,

“Without training…pupils risk unnecessary and avoidable long-term loss of skills.”

I will be pushing on exactly this matter in Scotland.

This debate is an opportunity to put these issues firmly on the record, to raise awareness across Parliament and to ensure that families living with PANS and PANDAS feel heard. I am grateful to colleagues here today and look forward to hearing their contributions and the Minister’s response.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I am in awe of the hon. Member for running the marathon and, of course, for raising funds for PANS and PANDAS.

--- Later in debate ---

[Wendy Chamberlain]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for your very kind remarks about Albie and others in today’s debate. A number of themes have been discussed by the hon. and right hon. Members, and I have always found that the number of MPs who join the PANS PANDAS all-party parliamentary groups increases over the term of the Parliament, because they get involved through casework. Hearing from the hon. Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns), and from my hon. Friends the Members for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) and for Mid Dunbartonshire (Susan Murray), about their constituents’ experiences brought that to light.

I commend the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Solihull West and Shirley (Dr Shastri-Hurst), for his debut at the Dispatch Box. Both he and the Minister talked about the intersection that PANS/PANDAS, their diagnosis and symptoms represent. What families are finding challenging is that that intersection has not been properly recognised, and children often end up going down a mental health pathway, where they are left in limbo for far too long. We often talk about the pressure on mental health services and young people, but if we could diagnose PANS/PANDAS sooner, we would potentially not set off children down that pathway.

I want to mention young people and their families. The challenge that is presented has been well illustrated, and I hope that those in the Gallery, and those watching online, feel seen and heard following both today’s debate and the recent youth board. In the last Parliament, I passed a private Member’s Bill that gives people the right to carer’s leave. When I was doing that work, we spoke to carers who talked about feeling guilty that the administration involved in being carers prevented them from actually being able to care. In relation to PANS/PANDAS, that comes through very strongly.

We clearly need to do a whole lot more to build awareness. My husband and I were watching the film “I Swear” a few weeks ago—if any Members have not seen it, I highly recommend it. My husband turned to me at the point when John Davidson, who is depicted in the film, attempted to kill himself as a young person who was starting to deal with his Tourette’s. My husband said, “Do you think PANS might have caused his condition, given the way that it came on and was described in the film?” That might just be the case. How many conditions or symptoms that we see could be down to PANS/PANDAS? As the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) said consistently during the debate, early treatment and testing via the use of antibiotics might just be the way to prevent some of the more serious symptoms.

I have been encouraged by what I have heard from the Minister today, and I look forward to engaging with her and supporting her engagement with the Scottish Government. I thank everybody for being here on such a warm day and for taking the time to contribute.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the diagnosis and treatment of Paediatric Acute-onset Neuropsychiatric Syndrome (PANS) and Paediatric Autoimmune Neuropsychiatric Disorders Associated with Streptococcal Infections (PANDAS).

Secondary Breast Cancer

Wendy Chamberlain Excerpts

Thursday 11th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Betts. Some people, both in this place and outside of it, say that politicians are out of touch, that they do not care and that they do not bring their lived experience to the Chamber. I want to thank the hon. Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton) for everything that she did in her role as Health Minister and for her powerful speech. It should be essential watching for those who say otherwise about politicians’ intentions in this place.

I congratulate the hon. Member for City of Durham (Mary Kelly Foy) and my hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) on securing this debate, and I thank them for telling their own cancer experiences. Like most Members, I have been impacted by breast cancer in that my mother is a survivor. She was diagnosed when I was away from home for the first time at university. It was difficult for the family to receive that diagnosis and difficult for me, knowing that my mum was going through treatment while I was far away from home. I am pleased to say that she is still with us.

My colleague and friend in the Liberal Democrats in North East Fife, Councillor Fiona Corps, is currently stable after undergoing treatment for lobular breast cancer. She messaged me today to say she started her new meds yesterday. It is only two years since her daughter’s leukaemia fight. Fiona and her family have been through a lot. Her diagnosis brought me to speak to the lobular breast cancer campaign and I, like others, want to focus my remarks on that cancer in particular. Part of that is because, in relation to secondary breast cancer, the unmet clinical need of lobular breast cancer means the chances of it spreading are incredibly high. Indeed, for many who are diagnosed it has already spread by the time of their diagnosis.

It is important to note that this year marks 50 years since doctors first knew that lobular breast cancer was a distinct condition. I had not been born—just—we did not yet have Sony Walkmans, personal computers or mobile phones, “Don’t Go Breaking My Heart” was No. 1 for six weeks, and “Rocky” won best picture. I know it has been a long time since Scotland were in the World Cup, but this really was a long time ago. Here we are 50 years later in a world with advances that were unimaginable back then, but we have made painfully little progress on the diagnosis and treatment of lobular breast cancer.

As others have referenced, it is not like we think breast cancer is. As a woman, I have been taught to check for lumps—my mother’s experience made that more acute—but lobular cells grow in single lines that spread out over tissue. If a somebody did a lump check today, the chances are they would not spot it. Even more worryingly, if somebody goes for a mammogram, it will probably not show up there either. As others have referenced, 22 people are diagnosed with lobular breast cancer every day, but the reality is that we do not know how many people might be living with the disease and getting progressively more ill without treatment.

As of today, we still understand very little about it and there are no dedicated treatments for it. I am conscious that health is a devolved issue. I am standing here as a Scottish MP, but given the Minister’s responsibilities, I will note that the Government’s recent cancer action plan for England did not mention lobular breast cancer. We can say that other treatments are available, and Fiona and others are taking other treatments, but they are hit and miss. I have engaged with the Lobular Moon Shot Project and with Tristan—a constituent of my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne)—and the story of his wife, Susan. She had eight different generic breast cancer treatments, none of which worked. Frankly, that lack of treatment kills people.

That is why lobular breast cancer is so relevant to the debate on secondary breast cancer. Not enough people know what to look for because it does not show up on tests, it is diagnosed late, and when it is diagnosed, there is not a dedicated treatment pathway for it. It is a recipe for a cancer spreading and we heard very powerfully from the hon. Member for West Lancashire what a diagnosis of secondary breast cancer means.

Unsurprisingly, there is still a lot that we do not know about what happens when the cancer spreads. We know it can spread to areas where other cancers do not like to, such as the outside membrane of the spine. We also know that the cells can lie dormant for years before starting to spread again. What we do not know is why any of that happens, how it can be identified, or how it can be stopped.

There could be hope. As others have referenced, researchers across this country are ready to take on this challenge. Importantly, there is cross-party support for getting this done; it is probably one of the most bipartisan campaigns in the history of this place. The Liberal Democrats are behind it; our leader, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), asked the Prime Minister about funding last summer. Indeed, I recently asked the then Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, the right hon. Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), about the project. He suggested that the money was there to fund the project, but work was needed on the programme of research. I say to the Minister: that is not how those involved with the project see it. This is a campaign that almost every Opposition MP supports, as well as huge numbers of those in the governing Labour party. Outwith this place, 84% of Labour voters surveyed in 2024 wanted lobular breast cancer research to be funded.

As others have said, £20 million over a five-year settlement equates to £238 per person for every person diagnosed over the next 10 years. Although I do not believe that life-changing research should be about a cost-benefit analysis, £238 is nothing compared with the costs of patients being out of the labour market and being treated over several years with the wrong thing—successfully or not.

I know that the Lobular Moon Shot Project is calling on devolved Governments to step up as well and provide £1 million per year for research to be carried out in their countries; the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) referred to that, too. I call on the new Scottish Government and the new Cabinet Secretary for Health and Care to take this ask incredibly seriously.

I am sure that the Minister will refer to the current National Institute for Health and Care Research funding round. I do not want to pre-empt that—it is, of course, important— but it is not the same funding as is needed for the Lobular Moon Shot Project, which is research into the underlying biology of lobular breast cancer. Such research will remain weak until we know what it is we are trying to treat. We need funding for research into the underlying biology, so that lobular breast cancer can be identified, diagnosed and treated. That will improve outcomes drastically, including reducing the number of people with secondary breast cancer, which is the topic of this debate.

I will conclude by saying that my hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham has demonstrated very visibly that breast cancer is not simply a female issue, so I will end today by reflecting on the fact that anyone can get cancer. Many of those who do get cancer will make a full recovery. For some, cancer is something they will live with for the remainder of their life, but it will not be the condition from which they die. However, we have heard today that secondary breast cancer is decisive in terms of people’s life expectancy. We must let those women and men know that they are not alone.

[Mr Clive Betts (in the Chair)]

We now move on to the Front Benchers.

Allied Health Professionals

Wendy Chamberlain Excerpts

Thursday 23rd April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for opening the debate, and to the hon. Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) for her work on the APPG and as a physiotherapist.

Medical staff in my constituency and across the country are the backbone of our national health service. While doctors and nurses are often front of mind when the public think about the NHS workforce, as we have heard this afternoon an army of highly skilled professionals keep our health services running every single day. They save lives, provide comfort in moments of fear and, as set out so brilliantly by the hon. Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst), aid rehabilitation, enabling people to get back to their normal lives.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

I am conscious that this debate is on a devolved matter, but I thought it worth mentioning that the Allied Health Professions Federation held a hustings for the Scottish Parliament elections earlier today. Topics included having input from health professionals during primary care and the crisis in vacancies. On rehab, does my hon. Friend agree that we need to ensure that allied health professionals get the access they need to, for example, care home patients, so that we can get those people out of hospital and into the right setting to receive the care that they need?

[Alison Bennett]

My hon. Friend is right. We know that with the right support, often from allied health professionals, people do not need to present at A&E and they can get out of hospital and into suitable accommodation with the right level of support much more quickly, which is better for them as individuals and also supports the NHS in carrying out its functions more efficiently.

Many of our allied health professionals—the third largest professional group in the NHS—do amazing work, as we have heard. They are central to prevention, diagnosis, treatment and public health. As pressures on our health and care services have grown, their role has become indispensable. From the paramedic first on the scene in an emergency, to the radiographer enabling rapid diagnosis and the physiotherapist helping someone regain their independence, those professionals are there at every stage of the patient journey. They are often the difference between life and death, between recovery and long-term disability, between dependence and independence, yet their contribution is overlooked.

After years of mismanagement, our NHS has been left on its knees. Nowhere is that more visible than in our emergency departments. We have seen avoidable deaths in A&E waiting rooms, we have seen patients waiting hours for ambulances, and we have seen the shocking normalisation of corridor care—patients left on trolleys without privacy, dignity or proper attention. There are now even reports of people receiving end-of-life care in hospital corridors. This is a health system under intolerable strain. Public confidence is being shaken. It is no surprise that two thirds of people are worried about long A&E waits.

The data is stark. Last year saw the worst level of 12-hour trolley waits ever recorded. On average, hospital trusts are now seeing thousands of patients waiting more than 24 hours in A&E every year. That is unacceptable. The Liberal Democrats have been leading the call to end corridor care within a year. We believe the crisis can be tackled, but only with serious, practical action. That includes creating a bank of safety net social care places and expanding step-down care for patients who are medically fit to leave hospital but still need support.

At the heart of the solution are allied health professionals. By delivering rehabilitation packages through physio- therapists, occupational therapists and others, we can help people leave hospital sooner, recover more quickly, and regain their independence at home. That is better for patients and it is essential for freeing up hospital capacity and ending the gridlock in A&E.

Will the Government commit to ending corridor care and 12-hour waits this year, and will they back that commitment with real investment in community care, social care and the allied health workforce? If we are to rely on those professionals—as we must, and as we already do—we need to support them properly. Right now, working conditions across the NHS are driving morale into the ground. Staff face inflexible rotas, burnout and, shockingly, workplace violence. That is not sustainable for them or for the patients they serve.

The Liberal Democrats have a number of proposals that we would be grateful if the Minister considered. We would establish a truly independent pay review body. We would expand access to affordable childcare so NHS staff can balance their family with their careers. We are also calling for action on everyday costs such as reducing car parking charges at hospitals. Those are practical steps that would make a real difference.

There are also growing staffing pressures among the allied health professionals. The Library reports that there has been a 57% increase in allied health professional full-time equivalents over the last decade, with the number of employees rising from 75,000 to 118,000. However, in conversations with the Royal College of Podiatry, it described high vacancy levels for NHS podiatry positions, a declining pipeline of applications to study podiatry programmes in England and rising demand for podiatrists’ services, all the while with the draw of working in the private sector. In physiotherapy, eight in 10 physiotherapists report that they do not have enough staff to meet demand, yet many services are facing recruitment freezes. Those contradictions speak volumes.

The long-delayed national workforce plan must finally deliver for allied health professionals. It must address regional shortages and embed these roles fully into workforce planning from the outset, not as an afterthought. If the Government are serious about shifting care into the community and focusing on prevention, investment in AHPs is essential. Too often, we see a gap between rhetoric and reality. While Ministers talk about prevention, funding decisions continue to prioritise short-term fixes elsewhere.

Our NHS is one of this country’s greatest achievements, but it cannot function without the people who sustain it. Allied health professionals are highly trained, autonomous practitioners. There are nearly 118,000 of them working across the NHS in England. They are central to modern, multidisciplinary care and to the future of a sustainable NHS. If we want a health service that prevents illness, reduces inequalities, and supports people to live healthier, longer lives, we must recognise and invest in their contribution. We must continue to fight for an NHS that works for patients, and we will continue to stand up for the staff, especially those too often overlooked, who are doing everything they can to get our NHS back on its feet, because they deserve nothing less.

Oral Answers to Questions

Wendy Chamberlain Excerpts

Tuesday 14th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Kinnock]

I know that the local town and county council have been working in partnership with Dorset ICB over many years to support GP partnerships in the Chickerell area in developing a business case for NHS capital or revenue funding. I would be delighted to meet my hon. Friend, and to continue to make plans for applying pressure to ensure that this is delivered.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

Twenty-two people a day are diagnosed with lobular breast cancer, including my colleague Councillor Fiona Corps in North East Fife, but many more are living with it, because researchers and clinicians know so little about it. In advance of vigils next week, can we ensure funding for the Moon Shot Project, to give these women hope?

[Wes Streeting]

We strongly support the aims of the Moon Shot Project; the challenge has been getting the proposal to a suitable standard for funding. The moment we overcome that obstacle, the money will be there.

Acquired Brain Injury Action Plan

Wendy Chamberlain Excerpts

Thursday 4th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dame Siobhain. I congratulate the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) on securing this important debate. Every 90 seconds, someone in the UK is admitted to hospital with an acquired brain injury. Participation in sport carries some of the highest risks. This is most evident in children, adolescents and young adults.

The University of Bath was recently named sports university of the year, and we are all very proud in my constituency. It is a national leader in making sports such as rugby safer while preserving the hugely positive health and community benefits of participation. Rugby is at the forefront of developing ways to identify and manage brain injuries and, crucially, to prevent these injuries in the first place.

It is about improving safety without losing what makes sports so valuable, exciting and enjoyable for players and communities. The University of Bath works directly with teams and governing bodies to research, trial and refine new safety protocols, ensuring that evidence rapidly translates into safer play at all levels. One such example is the Activate exercise programme, an evidence-based strategy to cut youth concussions by up to 60%, which has now been adopted internationally.

The University of Bath is also partnering with schools, including Beechen Cliff school in my constituency, to use instrumented mouthguards to monitor head impacts and guide approaches to preventing injuries in young players. I pay special tribute to Headway Bath, which provides specialist relief, cognitive rehabilitation and support to adults who have suffered an acquired brain injury and their families and carers.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

My hon. Friend is right to congratulate Headway Bath. These local groups are so important in providing support within our constituencies and are sometimes used by us to signpost people on. I highlight Graham Geddes, who set up Headway North East Fife in my constituency and has been nominated as volunteer of the year. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need to support this vital charity?

[Wera Hobhouse]

I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. I congratulate her branch of Headway on its wonderful work and the award it is about to receive. What would we do without local charities leading the way and, often, guiding us?

In Bath, North East Fife and other constituencies across the country, Headway provides day services throughout the week, online groups and bespoke one-to-one outreach rehabilitation support. That vital support makes a real difference to the lives of sufferers of acquired brain injuries, but I am sure many hon. Members will echo the fact that local Headway charities are under severe financial strain. Seven have closed in the last three years and others are struggling to meet rising demand with shrinking resources.

This debate is a crucial opportunity to ensure that the ABI action plan tackles these challenges. The 2024 report of the Lancet commission on dementia prevention, intervention and care estimates that almost half of dementia cases worldwide could be prevented or delayed if we act on 14 modifiable risk factors. Among them is traumatic brain injury, which alone is estimated to contribute to around 3% of global dementia cases.

As we have mentioned, some high-contact sports, such as rugby and boxing, carry a higher risk of traumatic brain injury, but we must not forget that regular physical activity is one of the most powerful tools we have to protect brain health. Exercise improves memory, supports thinking skills and lowers the risk of dementia through its wider benefits to cardiovascular and metabolic health.

Addressing the full range of modifiable risks such as high blood pressure, smoking, physical inactivity and obesity, alongside reducing exposure to head injury, means we could lower dementia risk for an estimated 27 million people worldwide. Our task now is not to pit exercise against safety, but to balance the risks of head injury with the overwhelming health benefits of sport. Protecting athletes of all ages from avoidable head injury must sit at the heart of that effort.

I echo the call from Alzheimer’s Research UK for dedicated funding from national Government, sport governing bodies and research councils to advance research into the complex relationship between sport, traumatic brain injury and dementia prevention. I hope that the Government listen.

Unpaid Carers: Inequalities

Wendy Chamberlain Excerpts

Thursday 20th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

It is a pleasure, as always, to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I thank the hon. Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) for securing this important debate in honour of carers’ day-to-day rights, and for her work in the all-party parliamentary group on carers. I declare an interest as an honorary vice-president of Carers UK and a trustee of the board of Fife Carers Centre; both are incredible organisations. I also want to recognise other organisations that provide support in this area, include Sheffield University’s Centre for Care, the Carers Trust and Fife Young Carers, which provides support to young carers in my North East Fife constituency and beyond.

Unpaid care is part of almost all our lives, whether we recognise it or not. I am no exception. When I started campaigning for the Liberal Democrats, and then became an MP under the leadership of my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), who is a carer himself and a prominent activist—in fact, I almost once described him as my carer—I became truly involved with the fight for the rights of unpaid carers. As a newish Back-Bench MP, it was an incredible opportunity, and it was also quite fun and exciting to be able to get a law passed: the private Member’s Bill that became the Carer’s Leave Act 2023.

Looking back now, what I remember most is the amazing people I met during that time in North East Fife, and throughout the country—just a handful of the 5.8 million unpaid carers, impressive in their resilience, love and thoughtfulness. I was moved by what was behind that resilience and humour: the tiredness, strain and financial difficulties, as well as the constant worry of thinking about someone else.

I intend to use my time to reflect on the 2023 Act and what more needs to be done. It is disheartening that, in the two and a half years since the Act was passed, evidence suggests that things are still getting worse. Research by Carers UK, “State of Caring 2025”, which the hon. Member for Shipley referred to, shows that 49% of carers have had to cut back on essentials; in 2023, that figure was 34%, already elevated from 25% in 2022, and it was just 13% in 2021. This is not the result of bad luck or the same impact from the cost of living crisis as we all see; the rate of poverty among unpaid carers is 50% higher than in the rest of the population. This is clearly the outcome of structural inequalities that the Government need to address.

There are some other things that the Government can do immediately to ease the financial burden on unpaid carers, particularly those in receipt of carer’s allowance. I pay tribute to the long work of Baroness Pitkeathley on behalf of unpaid carers, both in the other place and beyond. On Tuesday, she asked the Minister of State at the Department for Work and Pensions in the House of Lords when we can expect the publication of the independent review into carer’s allowance overpayments. I would be most grateful for some further detail on that from the Minister and colleagues in the DWP, other than “by the end of the year”, given that it is only four weeks until the House rises for Christmas recess. When in that period can we expect the report to be published, and will there be time for parliamentary scrutiny of it? The overpayments scandal has affected thousands of people across the UK. The last thing that unpaid carers, and indeed the MPs representing them, want is a written statement hurriedly published in late afternoon on 18 December.

As we are still awaiting publication of the review and the Government’s response to it, I will set out some of the reforms needed to end the financial inequalities experienced by unpaid carers. The carer’s allowance earnings threshold must be pegged to the minimum wage, so that no unpaid carers in work ever find themselves earning “too much”, simply because the Government made it so. The rules on what unpaid carers can earn must be made clearer, and DWP staff must be trained better to prevent future inadvertent overpayments. Of course, the Timms review of personal independence payments must make sure not to disadvantage unpaid carers. I should acknowledge that my constituents in Scotland are now in receipt of the equivalent carer’s support payments.

Referring again to the Carer’s Leave Act, last night I attended the carers’ rights event in Parliament, where I was pleased to speak to a number of businesses that are already going above and beyond the provisions in the Act. They are doing that because they believe it makes good business sense. For them, it is about the psychological contract, improving employees’ loyalty and retaining them—staff retention is as important as recruitment.

I am pleased that the Government have published their terms of reference for the review of the Act. That has, in some respect, answered what was going to be my first question to the Minister. The bad news is that I have some other reflections on the back of yesterday’s announcement. The terms of reference published yesterday give a timeline for evidence gathering that started over a year ago, in autumn 2024. That is quite a lot of time for the Government to have been doing engagement and commissioned research before coming to Parliament or even announcing the review and what it aims to achieve. Will the Minister update us on what evidence and engagement has been secured to date?

There is a formal public consultation of 10 to 12 weeks to seek views. I know that unpaid carers, the networks that represent them and the organisations offering support will want to respond, but most of these structures are manned and run by volunteers or paid staff who are already stretched, and we know that unpaid carers have more than enough to deal with on a day-to-day basis already, and often feel guilty about the admin involved in their lives. Have the Government considered whether the 10-week consultation period will be long enough? What steps will they take to reach people and engage on the ground?

On the findings of the review, I have my suspicions, which I have raised with the Government before, that not enough businesses were made aware of the new right under the Act. I fear not enough businesses trained their managers, HR teams and employees about it, and I fear that the Government gave insufficient information to employers and businesses about their obligations. Without adequate communications, not enough unpaid carers knew to see themselves as carers or that they were entitled to the support. If it is going to be a paid leave right, if that is the direction of travel, we need to get better at those things. I want to say in words the Government will understand that I firmly believe paid carer’s leave supports the growth agenda and will help the economy.

One thing I have loved about joining the board of Fife Carers is seeing the impact on the local organisation and volunteers. The centre was shortlisted as a finalist for providing outstanding carer service at this year’s inaugural Carers UK awards. That is quite something for an organisation that started with just one part-time worker 30 years ago. The nomination recognised the value of the support the organisation provides, whether its hospital carer self-care kits or its carer support groups. I had the pleasure of attending one in Leven recently and people were not backward in coming forward to talk about the changes they want to see.

Whether someone is working and caring or caring full time, they will inevitably be exhausted. The “State of Caring 2025” report says that 74% of carers feel stressed or anxious, and 42% say their physical health has declined. We all need a break sometimes; carers need and deserve it more than most, but how are they to manage that when they have someone relying on them day in, day out? The answer is funded respite care. I am sure my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett), my party’s spokesperson for care and carers, will mention that, given that she has a Bill before Parliament to ensure that unpaid carers are offered respite. I support that wholeheartedly. I hope the Minister can give us an update on that, too.

I am conscious of time, so I will end my remarks there. Inequalities exist and we have a responsibility here in this place to address them.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I thank the hon. Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) not only for securing this important debate on Carers Rights Day, but for all her work championing carers since her election to Parliament.

I welcome yesterday’s publication of the terms of reference of the employment rights for unpaid carers review, which suggests that the Government are looking in the right direction. However, as my hon. Friend the Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) noted, the pace is not as fast as it could be—it has already been going a year—and the period of consultation may actually be too short, given the demands that carers and the people who support them face, as everybody in this Chamber understands. I hope this review will usher in paid carer’s leave, as it would make the biggest difference for those on the lowest wages, who cannot currently afford to take unpaid carer’s leave.

This year, the theme of Carers Rights Day is, “Know your rights, use your rights”. It is all about making sure, as hon. Members have noted, that the millions of unpaid carers who support loved ones through illness and disability, know that they have access to support and rights, such as carer’s assessments, carer’s leave and hospital discharge support.

In my Mid Sussex constituency and across the UK, hundreds of thousands of people are waiting for social care. Many are stranded in hospital beds simply because the support they need in the community is not there, which in turn puts immense strain on our already creaking NHS. That is why my Liberal Democrat colleagues and I are campaigning so passionately for a social care system that values care users, supports care workers and, crucially, recognises the millions of unpaid carers who quietly keep this country going.

The hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns) set out her frustrations, which we share, with the pace of the Casey review. It is worth noting that only one cross-party meeting has happened since the Secretary of State announced that review in January, and a second meeting has not yet been convened. Can the Minister advise us when we can expect to secure a second meeting?

[Wendy Chamberlain]

I want to express my thanks to Baroness Casey, who, although she has been appointed to this commission, is doing other work for the Government. I would not want that to go unrecognised when we are talking about the delays.

[Alison Bennett]

I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend’s excellent point. It is regrettable that there seems to be only one person that the Government like to call on to do very important work across a number of different areas.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stuart Andrew (Daventry) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this afternoon, Ms Vaz. I am pleased to respond to this important debate on behalf of the Opposition, and I thank the hon. Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) for securing it and for her long-standing leadership on carers’ rights.

I acknowledge the contributions made by hon. Members across the House this afternoon. They have spoken very openly about their personal experiences, which helps to bring alive this debate and these issues. I am conscious that the hon. Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) talked about how much work he has to do before he even gets to work, which reflects what so many people across the country feel. As has just been said, unpaid carers are the backbone of our care system. They provide vital support to loved ones, often around the clock and with little recognition, and at great personal cost. This debate is therefore not just timely, but probably overdue.

Before entering Parliament, I spent over 15 years working mainly in palliative care, and much of that in children’s hospices—lastly at Martin House children’s hospice up in Yorkshire. I saw the extraordinary compassion, amazing resilience and sacrifice from unpaid carers every single day, whether from parents caring for their terminally ill children, many of whom had very complex needs, or relatives supporting someone at the end of their life—people managing both care and grief at the same time. I will always remember one parent saying they would consider it a good night’s sleep if they got up only eight times in the night to help their daughter, which gives an indication of how much work they do. As the hon. Member for Shipley said, so many carers end up giving up work because they have to provide that care. Sadly, so many relationships break down because of the pressures.

I now find myself having to care for my elderly father. I had to move him into my home, and I am now seeing at first hand the things people have to do. When I am here, I always worry, “Is he okay? Is there enough food and milk in the fridge?” I also watch every single move he makes. I once turned my back, for literally a minute, and he fell flat on his face. I realise that it was not my fault, but I cannot help but have those feelings of guilt.

I also pay tribute to the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) for her amazing work on the Carer’s Leave Act. That really is important, and the cross-party support for it showed Parliament at its best. It is great that carer’s leave is now a day one right and that it can be taken flexibly, because that is what unpaid carers need. They need to be able to take that half-day, or full day, if they need it because, as we have heard, one in seven are juggling work and caring responsibilities. I thank the hon. Lady and my hon. Friend the Member for Gosport (Dame Caroline Dinenage), who I know would like to have been here today—she gave quite a bit of support during the Act’s passage—for encouraging the previous Government.

[Wendy Chamberlain]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his kind comments. Passing a private Member’s Bill is obviously more straightforward with Government support, which I had, so I am grateful to him and his colleagues.

[Stuart Andrew]

It just shows how, when Parliament works well, it works exceptionally well.

I want to repeat some of the comments that have been made. The Government have launched a review of the potential benefits of paid carer’s leave, with the conclusions coming at the end of the year, I believe. As others have said, that is welcome, but I am sure that carers would hope that there will be clarity and no delays.

I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response to some of the issues that have been raised in this debate, and to hearing whether the Government are genuinely open to acting on the review’s findings. A fair point has been made about the length of time that people have to contribute to that consultation, given the responsibilities that they have. We must ensure that the consultation is accessible. I was a critic of this when we were in government, but doing just online consultations means that those who are not digitally savvy can be excluded. It is important we make sure that is not happening.

As other hon. Members have said, the financial pressures on carers remain severe, with one in four unpaid carers living in poverty. The employment rate among carers is just 50%, compared with 75% across the general population, but with the right support an estimated half a million carers could return to work. That would not only strengthen their security but contribute to the economy, which is what we all want to see.

In fairness, it is not just the Government who have to act; there is a responsibility on employers, too. I saw in the hospices that some businesses took on our young adults despite their life-limiting conditions. The employers told us that what they got from those individuals was utterly amazing, and that they were really dedicated to their work.

The recent increase to the carer’s allowance earnings limit is a step in the right direction, for which I thank the Government. However, the Carers Trust has rightly called for a full review of carer’s allowance and the wider support system. I am keen to hear whether that is something the Government are considering.

I am also concerned that the level of respite support has been falling, and has dropped by 6% in local authorities in the last year alone. I am concerned about, and pay tribute to, the charities that offer so much respite support. I know, from my consultations with charities, that the rise in national insurance contributions has had an impact, and that they have had to reduce and scale back their staffing. That is a concern, and I hope we recognise the size of their contribution.

At the hospices at which I worked, it was not just about end-of-life care. Some of the most important care they provided was respite stays. Either the child came on their own so that the family might go on holiday, or the whole family came together, which gave them the opportunity to be a family again. The child who needed care was being looked after by the care team, which meant the parents could be parents again to the siblings, who often miss out in such situations.

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis

Wendy Chamberlain Excerpts

Wednesday 19th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Tessa Munt]

I could not agree more. For far too long, patients have been dismissed, and that care element is incredibly important, because it affects so many people.

In July, the Department of Health and Social Care published the final delivery plan for ME, a cross-Government strategy aiming to improve attitudes, bolster research and better lives. It included some positive steps: new small grants for research into repurposed medications, and the development of a new service specification for mild and moderate ME. However, overall, the consensus of the charities and patient advocates I have spoken to is clear: the delivery plan falls far short of what was needed.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

I am interested in what my hon. Friend says about plans in England, because in my constituency we were privileged to have an incredible ME specialist nurse, Keith Anderson, who helped countless people. Sadly, he passed away two years ago, and since then there has been no specialist support in Fife—indeed, there is no specialist ME doctor or nurse in the whole of Scotland. Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the things any plan needs to consider is training, so that, no matter where someone is in the country, they can get access to a specialist?

[Tessa Munt]

I agree. In fact, we do not just need specialists; we also need training for GPs and other healthcare workers.

I will highlight four areas in which we need to see much more from the Government going forward. Given the gravity of the situation, I would appreciate it if the Minister could arrange for written responses to a number of my points.

The first area is funding. If the delivery plan felt threadbare, that is because no substantive new funding was attached to it. Before the plan was published, all 72 Lib Dem MPs signed a letter expressing our concerns about the anticipated lack of funding, which of course came to pass. To put it bluntly, what patients need is transformed NHS care and a step change in research. Neither is likely to happen without investing some money.

The case for investment is clear. I urge the Minister to see this not as a sunk cost, but as an investment in a group of people who are desperate to contribute to society. We know that one in five working-age adults are out of the workforce, many because of health problems, yet remarkably there was no modelling of the demography of those living with ME for the delivery plan exercise, and neither the Department of Health and Social Care nor the Department for Work and Pensions has an estimate of what the neglect of people with ME is costing our economy.

I would like to look at some of the figures. The most recent estimate of the economic impact of ME was for 2014-15—10 years ago—and was carried out by 20/20health. The cost was then calculated at £3.3 billion annually, based on only 260,000 people living with ME. With many more affected following the pandemic and a decade of inflation, that cost will now be much higher. Even the most conservative estimate of current numbers living with ME, excluding cases linked to long covid, puts them at 404,000 patients. Does the Minister accept, using that conservative estimate and adjusting for inflation, the annual economic impact of ME today is likely to be at least £7 billion? If those living with ME-like symptoms following covid are included, we could be approaching an annual cost of £20 billion. Surely it is time for the Government properly to cost the impact of a condition that affects so many, rather than brush it under the carpet, and to invest accordingly.

Covid: Fifth Anniversary

Wendy Chamberlain Excerpts

Thursday 12th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for West Ham and Beckton (James Asser) for securing the debate, and for the eloquent and passionate way in which he spoke. I agree that it has been hard preparing for this debate, because in many ways I think we have still to come to terms with what happened. For me, it was particularly strange as a new MP, as I was at the start of 2020. I arrived in this place expecting everything to be seen, debated and understood through the lens of Brexit, because that was how it had been in the recent years up to that point. Just three months after my election, we saw covid and national lockdowns, and everything changed. I recruited staff, handed them laptops and did not know when I would see and engage with them again.

This place was diminished too. The benefit of developing cross-party relationships is so valuable and we do not realise that until there is no opportunity for it. In the same way the hon. Member for West Ham and Beckton thanked those in his community, I recognise the staff here who did so much to facilitate the sitting of this House and the work that needed to be done.

Every day, as I come here, I walk past the national covid memorial. On a couple of occasions I have seen people updating or enhancing some of the fading that has taken place—and it is important that we do that. The memorial is across from this place, and we take this moment to remember the 200,000-plus people who died from covid-19 in the UK. The memorial is a daily, poignant reminder of the cruel, devastating and terrifying disease that covid was, especially in those early months. For those affected, the pain of that loss is still acute.

As a Scottish MP, I want to touch on how policy responses to the pandemic highlighted that often we do not have four-nation thinking and decision making. In those early days, everything was aligned and we saw the strength of intergovernmental thinking and decisions. As hard as it was, there was one set of rules and they applied everywhere. There is no doubt, however, that as time went on, the rules got more complex—inside, outside, work, two metres, rule of six and tiers—and they differed between the four nations. I had to have covid apps for Scotland and for England, and occasionally got pinged in different places by different apps. Another example from my constituency was the impact on golf and tourism, and that included the impact of the different rules.

We need to learn those lessons, and I am pleased to see that there is better intergovernmental working between the Scottish and UK Governments. However, where we have different policy responses, we always need to ensure that they are good, they are clear and they are for the right reasons.

Oral Answers to Questions

Wendy Chamberlain Excerpts

Tuesday 19th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Kinnock]

My hon. Friend is right: we will reform the dental contract to rebuild dentistry in the long term and to increase access to NHS dental care, with a shift to focusing on prevention and the retention of NHS dentists. We continue to meet representatives from the British Dental Association and other representatives of the sector to discuss how we can best deliver our shared ambition to improve access for NHS dental patients.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

5. What recent assessment he has made of the potential impact of proposed changes to employer national insurance contributions on staffing costs for health and care providers.

[The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Wes Streeting)]

The leadership shown by the Chancellor has enabled her and the Government to fix the foundations of the public finances and fill the £22 billion black hole left by the previous Government. The decisions that she took meant that she was able to provide this Department with an extra £26 billion and a real-terms increase in core local government spending power by about 3.2%. That was the right decision for the right reasons in the national interest, and I am taking into consideration pressures on all parts of health and social care before making final allocations for the year ahead.

[Wendy Chamberlain]

In North East Fife, we have a particular issue with access to dental surgeries, especially with the recent closure of a surgery in Leven. Difficulties stem from recruitment from abroad as a result of visa changes and also simply from practices going private and coming out of the system. Obviously, the NHS is devolved in Scotland, but does the Secretary of State agree that putting staffing under further strain from increasing national insurance contributions will only make things worse for dentists? What in his conversations is he doing to ensure that dentists get the support that they need?

[Wes Streeting]

It is because the Chancellor took the decisions that she did in the Budget that my Department has received £26 billion to reform and improve health and social care. As I said before the general election, all parts of the United Kingdom suffered under the previous Conservative Government, which is why I am sure that Members from across Scotland will welcome the extra £1.5 billion this year and £3.4 billion next year—the biggest funding increase since devolution. I am sure that the SNP Government will welcome the increase, and they certainly have no excuses now for not acting.

Access to Primary Healthcare

Wendy Chamberlain Excerpts

Wednesday 16th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Helen Morgan]

No, I will make some progress.

People do much better if they have access to continuity of care, but 8,000 more GPs are needed to deliver the rights that we laid out in our manifesto. We do not shy away from the fact that that is an ambitious objective, and we accept that it cannot be achieved through training and recruitment alone: we need to retain and incentivise our existing workforce. As I said earlier, seeing people in their communities avoids hospital admissions and saves money. Unfortunately, although the Conservatives promised us 6,000 more GPs in 2019, we ended up with 500 fewer. That is why people are so frustrated. According to the findings of research carried out by the House of Commons Library, GP funding has fallen by £350 million in real terms since 2019. As a result, not only are people struggling to gain access to basic care in their communities, but there is a postcode lottery when it comes to availability of that care.

In the area where I live, which is covered by NHS Shropshire, Telford and Wrekin, the number of fully qualified GPs fell from 280 in 2016 to 242 in 2023, despite an increased and increasingly ageing population with a much higher level of demand, while 43% of patients are waiting more than 28 days for non-urgent appointments. The Darzi report showed that the number of people waiting for long periods for appointments is rising throughout the country: it is a national issue. We know that from our own doorstep conversations.

Members might ask me, “Where are you going to get 8,000 more GPs from? That is a big number.” Apart from training new ones, we should value greatly our experienced ones. A recruitment and training programme is one idea, and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) pointed out, using the dentists we have trained properly is extremely important, but we also need to focus on retention and incentivising our existing GPs, to ensure that we hold on to valuable experience and valuable patient continuity.

Let me move on from GPs to local pharmacies. Pharmacy First was a great idea of the previous Government —I am willing to give them credit—but pharmacists are under huge strain. According to the Darzi report, some 1,200 have closed since 2017, and spending under the community contract has fallen. Tomorrow I am going to visit Green End pharmacy in Whitchurch, in my constituency, which wrote to me:

“As an independent pharmacy, we’re unable to keep on absorbing costs with losses on dispensing.”

The pharmacy is struggling because it is making losses on the drugs that it gives out on prescription. Given that it is a small, independent pharmacy, it does not have a massive shop from which to make profits to subside that work.

In 2023, Community Pharmacy England warned of

“systemic pharmacy funding cuts of at least 25% in real terms since 2015.”

That has led to a postcode lottery of access, and to many pharmacies being unable to have a full-time pharmacist and relying on locums, which has led to a really poor and insecure level of service. That is impacting on people who just need to go and pick up their prescription and get on with their day.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

The NHS is devolved in Scotland, but the UK Government have responsibility for continuity of supply of medications. I have constituents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder who have been waiting for up to a year to secure that continuity of supply. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need to see more action from the Government, who should be proactive in that regard?

[Helen Morgan]

That is a really important point. A lot of people in my constituency have contacted me for help with drugs—for example, to deal with ADHD. People need to be able to access important medication readily.

We must not forget the dentistry element of primary care. A generation of children are at risk of poor oral health because of the mess in which dentistry has been left by the previous Government. Tooth decay is the biggest cause of children being admitted to hospital, with over 100,000 admitted since 2018. That is totally unacceptable. Some 4.4. million children have not been seen by an NHS dentist in the last year, according to the House of Commons Library.

Dentistry is really important for children—they have to keep their teeth for the rest of their lives—but this issue affects adults too. My constituent Ron Kelly, who is 62, is disabled and lives in Market Drayton. Members who have been around a while might know that it is not easy to catch a bus to anywhere from Market Drayton. He has not been able to find a dentist since 2019, and my caseworkers have rung every NHS dentist in our constituency. None of them is taking on new patients, so even if he was able to use the bus, he would not be able to find an NHS dentist in North Shropshire at the moment.

Office for National Statistics data released last week shows that, in the midlands, 99% of people who do not have an NHS dentist, and who are trying to find an appointment, cannot access one—99%! It is just unbelievable in a modern country in the 21st century.