Asked by: Max Wilkinson (Liberal Democrat - Cheltenham)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment has his department made of the potential impact of access targets on continuity of care.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government values continuity in general practice, but this is not inconsistent with efforts to improve access, such as via the 24-hour access target where urgent treatment is required.
In the 2025/26 contract, one of the domains of the Capacity and Access Improvement Payment, worth £29.2 million, incentivises primary care networks to risk stratify their patients in accordance with need for continuity. This allows general practitioners (GPs) to deliver care to meet the specific needs of their patients.
We are investing an additional £1.1 billion in GPs to reinforce the front door of the National Health Service, bringing total spend on the GP Contract to £13.4 billion in 2025/26, which is the biggest cash increase in over a decade. The 8.9% boost to the GP Contract in 2025/26 is greater than the 5.8% growth to the National Health Service budget as a whole.
Over ten million more GP appointments have been delivered in the 12 months to September 2025 compared to the same period last year, building capacity for continuity of care and improving access so that patients can be seen when they need to be in primary care. Patient satisfaction with access has improved significantly, rising from 61% in July 2024 to 74% in July 2025, marking a 13-percentage-point increase over the last year.
Asked by: Perran Moon (Labour - Camborne and Redruth)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential impact of transport, housing instability, language barriers and digital exclusion on patient engagement with QOF requirements in high-deprivation areas.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
In the 2024 to 2025 contract year, 83.2% of practices achieved over 90% of the available Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) points. General practices (GPs) servicing populations in areas of higher deprivation face greater levels of unmet need and barriers to patient engagement, which can affect delivery against contractual frameworks, such as QOF.
The indicators and thresholds included in the QOF are developed in accordance with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines and are underpinned by a robust evidence base. Thresholds are designed to be attainable, reflecting the potential challenges involved with delivering the intended outcomes for certain interventions or care practices, while encouraging and incentivising practices to provide the best possible care. Thresholds are aspirational rather than a contractual obligation.
We recognise the importance of ensuring funding for core services is distributed equitably between practices across the country. This is why we are currently reviewing the way GP funding is allocated across England (the Carr-Hill formula). The review will look at how health needs are reflected in the distribution of funding through the GP Contract.
To ensure that patients are not digitally excluded, the GP Contract is clear that patients should always have the option of telephoning or visiting their practice in person, and all online tools must always be provided in addition to, rather than as a replacement for, other channels for accessing a GP. Practice receptions should be open so that patients without access to telephone or online services are in no way disadvantaged.
In 2025, NHS England published an improvement framework for community language, translation, and interpreting services to support the provision of consistent, high-quality community language translation and interpreting services by the National Health Service to people with limited English proficiency. In primary care, the framework supplements the existing guidance for commissioners on interpreting and translation services.
NHS England’s statement on information on health inequalities sets out details on the recording of housing status. This can enable a better understanding of how social risk factors such as insecure housing or homelessness affects health outcomes and health inequalities. The statement is available at the following link:
https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/nhs-englands-statement-on-information-on-health-inequalities/
Asked by: Perran Moon (Labour - Camborne and Redruth)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of higher rates of missed GP appointments in deprived areas on practices’ ability to deliver QOF requirements.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
In the 2024 to 2025 contract year, 83.2% of practices achieved over 90% of the available Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) points. General practices (GPs) servicing populations in areas of higher deprivation face greater levels of unmet need and barriers to patient engagement, which can affect delivery against contractual frameworks, such as QOF.
The indicators and thresholds included in the QOF are developed in accordance with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines and are underpinned by a robust evidence base. Thresholds are designed to be attainable, reflecting the potential challenges involved with delivering the intended outcomes for certain interventions or care practices, while encouraging and incentivising practices to provide the best possible care. Thresholds are aspirational rather than a contractual obligation.
We recognise the importance of ensuring funding for core services is distributed equitably between practices across the country. This is why we are currently reviewing the way GP funding is allocated across England (the Carr-Hill formula). The review will look at how health needs are reflected in the distribution of funding through the GP Contract.
To ensure that patients are not digitally excluded, the GP Contract is clear that patients should always have the option of telephoning or visiting their practice in person, and all online tools must always be provided in addition to, rather than as a replacement for, other channels for accessing a GP. Practice receptions should be open so that patients without access to telephone or online services are in no way disadvantaged.
In 2025, NHS England published an improvement framework for community language, translation, and interpreting services to support the provision of consistent, high-quality community language translation and interpreting services by the National Health Service to people with limited English proficiency. In primary care, the framework supplements the existing guidance for commissioners on interpreting and translation services.
NHS England’s statement on information on health inequalities sets out details on the recording of housing status. This can enable a better understanding of how social risk factors such as insecure housing or homelessness affects health outcomes and health inequalities. The statement is available at the following link:
https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/nhs-englands-statement-on-information-on-health-inequalities/
Asked by: Perran Moon (Labour - Camborne and Redruth)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what research his Department has commissioned on the drivers of lower QOF attainment in deprived areas.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
In the 2024 to 2025 contract year, 83.2% of practices achieved over 90% of the available Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) points. General practices (GPs) servicing populations in areas of higher deprivation face greater levels of unmet need and barriers to patient engagement, which can affect delivery against contractual frameworks, such as QOF.
The indicators and thresholds included in the QOF are developed in accordance with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines and are underpinned by a robust evidence base. Thresholds are designed to be attainable, reflecting the potential challenges involved with delivering the intended outcomes for certain interventions or care practices, while encouraging and incentivising practices to provide the best possible care. Thresholds are aspirational rather than a contractual obligation.
We recognise the importance of ensuring funding for core services is distributed equitably between practices across the country. This is why we are currently reviewing the way GP funding is allocated across England (the Carr-Hill formula). The review will look at how health needs are reflected in the distribution of funding through the GP Contract.
To ensure that patients are not digitally excluded, the GP Contract is clear that patients should always have the option of telephoning or visiting their practice in person, and all online tools must always be provided in addition to, rather than as a replacement for, other channels for accessing a GP. Practice receptions should be open so that patients without access to telephone or online services are in no way disadvantaged.
In 2025, NHS England published an improvement framework for community language, translation, and interpreting services to support the provision of consistent, high-quality community language translation and interpreting services by the National Health Service to people with limited English proficiency. In primary care, the framework supplements the existing guidance for commissioners on interpreting and translation services.
NHS England’s statement on information on health inequalities sets out details on the recording of housing status. This can enable a better understanding of how social risk factors such as insecure housing or homelessness affects health outcomes and health inequalities. The statement is available at the following link:
https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/nhs-englands-statement-on-information-on-health-inequalities/
Asked by: Perran Moon (Labour - Camborne and Redruth)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department is taking to support general practices serving populations with higher levels of multimorbidity and patient complexity to meet QOF indicators.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
In the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), clinical indicators all have a target population. Patients with co-morbidities are included in all relevant target populations and registers where they meet the defined criteria. These patients are eligible for the interventions outlined in all relevant disease areas and as such, practices are reimbursed for these interventions.
The indicators and thresholds included in the QOF are developed in accordance with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines, underpinned by a robust evidence base.
We recognise the importance of ensuring funding for core services is distributed equitably between practices across the country. This is why we are currently reviewing the way general practice funding is allocated across England (the Carr-Hill formula). The review will look at how health needs are reflected in the distribution of funding through the GP Contract.
Over the past 16 months, the Government has invested an extra £1.1 billion into primary care, prevented over 3,000 GPs from graduating into unemployment, and have halved the number of targets GPs are held to so GPs spend more time caring for patients. Over 6.5 million more GP appointments have been delivered in the 12 months to November 2025 compared to the same period last year, building capacity for continuity of care and improving access so that patients can be seen when they need to be in primary care.
Asked by: Zarah Sultana (Your Party - Coventry South)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what recent assessment he has made of the potential impact of the use of non-medical clinical practitioners in primary care on patients’ ability to see a fully qualified doctor; and what steps he is taking to ensure newly qualified doctors are able to obtain appropriate posts within the NHS.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
We hugely value the unique work carried out by general practitioners (GPs). The 10 Year Workforce Plan will ensure that the National Health Service has the right people in the right places, with the right skills to deliver the best care for patients, when they need it.
GPs remain at the heart of general practice and primary care. However, there is a wide range of clinicians who are well suited to providing care in general practice as part of a multi-disciplinary team. For example, a patient with osteoarthritis might benefit from seeing a physiotherapist. In relation to physician assistants (still legally known as physician associates), Professor Leng’s recent review was clear that, with changes in line with its recommendations, there remains a place for these roles as supporting, complementary members of medical teams, including in general practice.
The Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme (ARRS) provides funding for a number of additional roles, to help create bespoke, multi-disciplinary teams. All these roles are in place to assist general practice doctors in reducing their workload and assisting patients directly with their needs, allowing doctors to focus on more complex patients and other priorities, including continuity of care.
The Government has highlighted its commitment to GPs, and since October 2024, we have funded primary care networks with an additional £160 million to recruit recently qualified GPs through the ARRS. Over 2,600 individual GPs have now been recruited, preventing them graduating into unemployment. This was a measure to respond to feedback from the profession and to help solve an immediate issue of GP unemployment.
Over ten million more general practice appointments have been delivered in the 12 months to September 2025 compared to the same period last year, building capacity for continuity of care and improving access so that patients can be seen when they need to be in primary care.
Asked by: Luke Evans (Conservative - Hinckley and Bosworth)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether he plans to reform the general practice funding model.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
We recognise the importance of ensuring that the funding for core general practice (GP) services is distributed equitably between practices across the country. My Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, announced on 25 June that, through the 10-Year Health Plan, the Government will review the GP funding formula, the Carr-Hill formula, with the aim of ensuring that resources are targeted where they are most needed.
In November, I wrote to MPs to inform them of the details of the review.
The review is being conducted by the National Institute for Health and Care Research and the commencement of the review was announced on 9 October. Recommendations are expected in March 2026. The review will draw on a range of evidence and advice from experts, with a focus on how health need is reflected in funding. Ministers will then decide whether to proceed with the technical development and testing of a new formula, and any other changes motivated by the review.
Implementation of any new funding approach will be subject to ministerial decision, in the context of the available funding and our commitment to substantively reform the General Medical Services Contract within this Parliament.
Asked by: James Naish (Labour - Rushcliffe)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to tackle health disparities amongst people who lived in the most deprived areas of the UK.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is committed to increasing the amount of time people spend in good health and to preventing premature deaths, with a vision of ensuring that all individuals, regardless of background or location, live longer, healthier lives.
Our 10-Year Health Plan for the National Health Service in England sets out a reimagined service designed to tackle inequalities in both access and outcomes, as well as to give everyone, no matter who they are or where they come from, the means to engage with it on their own terms.
For example, we know that the Carr-Hill formula is considered outdated, and evidence suggests that general practitioners (GPs) serving in deprived parts of England receive on average 9.8% less funding per needs-adjusted patient than those in less deprived communities, despite having greater health needs and significantly higher patient-to-GP ratios. This is why we are currently reviewing the formula to ensure that resources are targeted where they are most needed.
Additionally, much of what determines health and wellbeing is influenced by factors other than health services. As a result, we are taking bold action across Government on the social determinants of health to build a fairer Britain. Recent cross-Government action has included the introduction of Awaab’s Law and reform of the Decent Homes Standard for the social and private rented sector, the English Devolution Bill, and a new statutory health and heath inequalities duty for Strategic Authorities.
Asked by: Alison Bennett (Liberal Democrat - Mid Sussex)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential factors that may prevent women from seeking diagnosis and referral for lipoedema; and what steps he is taking to ensure timely access to specialist assessment and treatment.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Women with lipoedema can face a number of barriers to seeking diagnosis and referral, including long waits, misdiagnosis, often as obesity or lymphoedema, and low awareness of the condition among both the public and some healthcare professionals. These factors can lead to delayed recognition, worsening symptoms, and reduced confidence in seeking care.
We recognise the need to improve awareness and understanding of lipoedema. To support earlier, more accurate diagnosis, the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) has worked in partnership with Lipoedema UK to develop a dedicated e‑learning module for general practitioners, covering the presentation, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of lipoedema in primary care. This resource is freely available to RCGP members.
Access to specialist assessment and treatment for lipoedema is commissioned locally by integrated care boards, which are best placed to understand local population need. Treatment options may include compression therapy, simple lymphatic drainage, self‑management support and, in severe cases, consideration of liposuction in line with interventional procedures guidance published by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Clinicians may offer treatment where appropriate, using their professional judgment and taking advice published by NICE into account.
We are aware that some European countries, including Germany, have expanded access to liposuction for lipoedema following emerging evidence from the German LiPLEG study into liposuction. In England, NICE’s current guidance advises that evidence on the safety and efficacy of liposuction for chronic lipoedema remains limited, and it should only be offered with appropriate clinical governance and safeguards. NICE will review this guidance once the full LiPLEG data is available.
Asked by: Alison Bennett (Liberal Democrat - Mid Sussex)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether he has considered adopting approaches to lipoedema treatment used by other European countries, like Germany and Spain.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Women with lipoedema can face a number of barriers to seeking diagnosis and referral, including long waits, misdiagnosis, often as obesity or lymphoedema, and low awareness of the condition among both the public and some healthcare professionals. These factors can lead to delayed recognition, worsening symptoms, and reduced confidence in seeking care.
We recognise the need to improve awareness and understanding of lipoedema. To support earlier, more accurate diagnosis, the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) has worked in partnership with Lipoedema UK to develop a dedicated e‑learning module for general practitioners, covering the presentation, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of lipoedema in primary care. This resource is freely available to RCGP members.
Access to specialist assessment and treatment for lipoedema is commissioned locally by integrated care boards, which are best placed to understand local population need. Treatment options may include compression therapy, simple lymphatic drainage, self‑management support and, in severe cases, consideration of liposuction in line with interventional procedures guidance published by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Clinicians may offer treatment where appropriate, using their professional judgment and taking advice published by NICE into account.
We are aware that some European countries, including Germany, have expanded access to liposuction for lipoedema following emerging evidence from the German LiPLEG study into liposuction. In England, NICE’s current guidance advises that evidence on the safety and efficacy of liposuction for chronic lipoedema remains limited, and it should only be offered with appropriate clinical governance and safeguards. NICE will review this guidance once the full LiPLEG data is available.