debates/debates2025-02-11b conversation_5
Source: hansard.parliament.uk (2025-02-11)

UK Parliament Hansard data: debates/debates2025-02-11b conversation_5

Ellie Chowns:What progress his Department is making in reducing waiting times for elective care. \p Wes Streeting: This Government inherited a waiting list with a staggering 7.6 million people on it. Since July, that waiting list has already been reduced by almost 145,000, and ensuring that the NHS once again meets the 18-week standard for elective treatment is at the heart of the Government’s plan for change. Our elective reform plan sets out how we will meet that standard by the end of this Parliament, through a combination of investment and reform that Labour knows from past experience delivers results. \p Ellie Chowns: I get regular messages from constituents facing terrible waits for care with potentially serious consequences, including a one-year delay for an early dementia referral and an 18-month delay for a cardiology review. Although I understand the case for the short-term, one-off use of spare private capacity to tackle the backlog while the NHS is rebuilt, can the Secretary of State please outline his longer-term thinking regarding privatisation of the national health service? In particular, why is he encouraging the development of long-term relationships with the private sector? \p Wes Streeting: The NHS has always worked constructively with the independent sector, and I do not believe that ideological hobby horses should come before patients getting faster access to care. This Government are investing in our NHS, and before the hon. Lady complains about that, I would just point out that the Green party’s manifesto on the NHS said that it would require an

“additional annual expenditure of £8bn in the first full year”

of this Parliament, rising to £28 billion later. The Chancellor has just delivered a Budget that delivers £26 billion of additional investment, and the Greens complain about it. \p Deirdre Costigan: I welcome the new Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton), to her place. Hundreds of my constituents are on waiting lists for knee and hip operations, and while the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Ellie Chowns) says that she would like to see those waiting lists reduced, the Green party has done everything it can to oppose Labour’s plan for change—it opposed our Budget, with its record investment in the NHS, and it opposed our agreement with the independent sector to bring down the backlog. Does the Secretary of State agree that it is time for the Opposition parties to stop wishing for a reduction in waiting lists and start backing Labour’s credible plan to make a real difference? \p Wes Streeting: I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend. As we know from the Greens’ experience in local government, they cannot clear the bins, let alone the waiting lists. \p Lindsay Hoyle: I call the shadow Minister. \p Luke Evans: The Labour Government’s elective reform plan says that there are plans for 10 straight-to-test pathways. Can the Secretary of State name them, or give one example? \p Wes Streeting: It is absolutely ridiculous, Mr Speaker. Conservative Members turn up, criticising and carping about this Government’s elective reform plan, but I remind the hon. Gentleman that when his party was in office, it delivered the longest waiting lists in the history of the NHS. If he wants to do a pop quiz, he can use Google. \p Luke Evans: This is the Secretary of State’s own plan. There was one example in the plan, but as an article in The BMJ on 17 January helpfully pointed out, that one example—which featured Sarah, who had sinus pain and hearing issues—was quietly removed from all online and future drafts after

“a flurry of GPs pointed out that her treatment”

was “wholly inappropriate.” That article went on to say that

“Sarah can pick up her dose of unnecessary radiation along with her weekly shop.”

On this part of the Government’s plan, The BMJ concluded:

“Sarah’s story is one of over-investigation, fragmented and inappropriate care, spurious choice, and a lack of senior decision making at first presentation. Activity for activity’s sake has little to do with high quality care.”

Does the Secretary of State agree with The BMJ, and if not, why not? \p Wes Streeting: I always believe in holding our hands up when mistakes are made. I am happy to say that the reason that case study was removed from the published elective reform plan is because it was a genuine mistake, for which I accept responsibility as the Secretary of State. Now, maybe the Conservative party might like to accept responsibility for the highest waiting lists and lowest patient satisfaction in history, and finally have the decency to apologise to the country for the mess it left us in.