Zubir Ahmed MP: speeches

Speeches

• 1 Jun 2026 · Health Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Twenty-one years ago, when I started my NHS career as a junior doctor, there were Labour Governments in every part of Britain, and I was proud to have practised in every single nation of our country. The NHS then exemplified the mood of our nation: hopeful, comfortable in its own skin and confident about embracing, even shaping, its future. And we did shape that future. The Labour Government delivered world-class heart attack care, stroke care and cancer care, regardless of where someone lived and their ability to pay for it. We also drove through controversy to secure a smoke-free generation, starting in Scotland and then delivering it all across these isles. The success of that legislation is perhaps best exemplified in the fact that we now have a whole generation who feel it is their inalienable right to go indoors and never have to inhale passive smoke or suffer all the deleterious effects that come with it. Now, as then, the NHS is holding a mirror up to our society. For those who rely on it, there is anxiety and frustration about why, so often, we do not get the basics right, from grappling with the uncertainty of simply seeing a doctor or specialist to the anxiety that comes with waiting for a scan or its results. There are 1.5 million people working in the NHS—including once-idealistic surgeons like me, who unapologetically gave our youth to the NHS because we enjoyed our craft so much that sometimes it did not even feel like work—but those staff have been battered by austerity and covid. They are hoping for better days but, despite the improvements that have been made in the last two years, I know that they harbour a quiet hopelessness that perhaps their workplace can never be joyful again. They are good people who are resigned to running faster just to stay still and keep their patients safe. All that is because of a 14-year-long Tory Government and the choices they made. They made political choices to rob Peter to pay Paul, and to fail to invest in our NHS. In an era of AI, technology and digital transformation, they left highly skilled staff with 21st-century clinical skills and 20th-century equipment, and left the public feeling more adrift than ever from their most prized national asset. Let us also not spare their handmaidens in Scotland, the Scottish National Government, who fared no better: NHS spending going up and productivity coming down; no NHS app to book appointments or get test results; lung cancer screening lagging behind; and 24/7 21st-century stroke care that is more like Russian roulette. It is in this mood of cynicism and despondency that this Labour Government are charged with the responsibility of modernising our NHS and showing that we dare to go big again: going big on giving more power and control to patients and the staff who look after them; going big on taking the bold decisions, even if controversial, on becoming the healthiest generation that has ever lived; and going big on grasping the opportunity that technology presents us with. That is the path we start on today. It answers the cries of patients and answers the call of those who want to look after them. Take the single patient record, which has been lauded in the news today as an exemplar of this Bill. It is a programme that, as health innovation Minister, I was proud to start off and bring my NHS experience to. It is a simple concept, demanded by patients and the vast majority of people who look after them, that there should be a single and comprehensive source of truth about a patient’s history when it is most needed. Most of the public believe it already exists, yet it has proven harder than ever to deliver because of conservatism, paralysed by the thought of the worst outcomes and unable to plan for the best outcomes, and by a belief that patient safety and data safety are somehow tangled up in the status quo. There is nothing safe about going from one hospital to another where a consultant cannot see your scans, or your child urgently attending an A&E department where their medical history cannot be seen or, as recently happened in my own practice in the middle of the night, having to turn down an organ donation because we could not access GP records at the weekend. What about data security? The NHS is dependent on thousands of IT systems born out of necessity rather than design. If we were designing it, we would never have done it this way, but we must now be absolutely committed to making sure that data is safe and that military-grade security prevails. During my time as health innovation Minister, I was clear—as those on our Front Bench today are clear—that NHS data is sovereign and must be used for the benefit of patients. We can no longer afford to look the other way. We have to lean in to the arguments and the headwinds that say, “No, not yet” or, “Not this much all at once.” We have to say to our citizens, and to our NHS staff who demand we get the basics right, that we are ready to face down those headwinds, those noisy tweets and those vested interest positions and say loudly, “Yes, right now” and, “Yes, as big as we can,” because our NHS can, because its patients expect us to, and because its users demand us to go further. This movement and this party were born of difficult times to deliver in difficulty, and this Bill will definitely and ultimately deliver on that promise.

• 16 Apr 2026 · NHS Federated Data Platform · Hansard source

  More

  If the hon. Gentleman will allow me, I think I will answer his point shortly; in the interests of time, we have to be careful about interventions. We live in a fast-paced technological world, and that means that we always look to the next possible provider to provide value for money, so it is right that there are break clauses in the contract to allow evaluations to take place. I can reassure all hon. Members that, as a clinician and a Minister, my north star is always patient safety and quality, and of course value for money. If, at the point of the break clause, we evaluate and find that there are other providers that can do the job better, then of course that needs to be looked at and reflected upon. More generally, as the Minister for Health Innovation, Patient Safety and Life Sciences, I would not be doing my job properly if I did not try to champion British business at every opportunity or to champion British small and medium-sized enterprises to become British plcs. I hope hon. Members will take that as read. The contract has extension provisions and will be reviewed in line with standard contract management processes. We will decide later this year whether to extend it. NHS England will be transparent about the process and the evidence used, as we have been throughout our regular performance reviews for this contract and the FDP. On digital sovereignty, our priority is to give patients the care they need. As Members will no doubt understand, for some essential IT services, it is simply not possible to develop in-house solutions, as we seek the best from the market. I reflect on my own practice in Glasgow, in the Queen Elizabeth university hospital, which the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East seems to think has found a panacea of publicly delivered technology. I can tell him that when I walk into that hospital, I login through Microsoft Windows. Then I open a programme built by a North American tech company to order test results. Then I open another programme built by a North American tech company to look at the results of those tests. Finally, if I want to check X-rays, I open a fourth programme built by a North American technology company to evaluate CT scans, MRI scans and X-rays.

• 16 Apr 2026 · NHS Federated Data Platform · Hansard source

  More

  It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dame Siobhain. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for securing this important debate and for his and other hon. Members’ contributions to it. Of course, we should also welcome the hon. Member for Solihull West and Shirley (Dr Shastri-Hurst) to his place in his first debate on the Front Bench. We have heard a lot about concerns and insights and interpretations about the NHS’s technological architecture. Some would have us think that the FDP is synonymous with just one company. It is not. The FDP is fundamentally an NHS construct. It consists of multiple contracts awarded to a number of consortia, including Palantir, Accenture, PwC, Carnall Farrar and the North of England Care System Support. [ Official Report, 22 April 2026; Vol. 784, c. 1WC.] (Correction) Each of those have different responsibilities to make sure that there is training, health expertise and security in the FDP. Ultimately, the FDP is a federation of local trusts and ICBs within NHS England, each with their own version of the FDP and their own abilities to decide which information they put there on the basis of their own service needs and governance arrangements. Although there should be scrutiny of Palantir and of any contract, we should also provide clarity about what the FDP is delivering for the NHS. It is my duty to make sure that the FDP is improving patient and clinical experience and improving patient outcomes. Making the best use of data generated by the NHS and social care is essential to transforming services, improving outcomes for patients and making sure that we use resources in the best manner possible. Lord Darzi’s independent investigation into the NHS found that, despite huge volumes of data, fundamentally: “The last decade was a missed opportunity to prepare the NHS” to use the latest technologies. The FDP is part of an infrastructure—it is not the infrastructure or the only infrastructure—to resolve that gap. It is improving efficiency and generating savings across the health service worth up to £2.4 billion, according to independent estimates. Those independent estimates are being further bolstered by a commissioned study by Imperial College that will look at the economic impact of the FDP. [ Official Report, 22 April 2026; Vol. 784, c. 2WC.] (Correction) It is an important tool for us being able to make the NHS fit for the future on clinical efficiency, transparency of data and outcomes for patients up and down the country. Before I go into more detail about what the FDP does, it is important that I say what it does not do. For instance, it is not synonymous with the single patient record, the NHS app or—necessarily—with linking primary care data with secondary care data.

• 14 Apr 2026 · National Suicide Prevention Standard · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Blaydon and Consett (Liz Twist) for securing this debate on a topic that is especially close to her heart and for her work more generally to promote action on suicide prevention. I am also grateful to hon. Members across the Chamber for their interventions. Every suicide is nothing short of a tragedy. It has lasting and devastating impacts on families, friends and communities. Ensuring that the right care and support are available to someone who may be struggling when and where they need it can make all the difference in saving a life. That is why reducing the numbers of lives lost to suicide is a key priority for this Government, and we are committed to taking forward the suicide prevention strategy for England. The strategy focuses on harnessing efforts across civil society to help identify and support people at risk. Standards such as the one produced by the British Standards Institution play an important role in raising the profile of suicide prevention in England and in supporting employers to play their part. I take this opportunity to congratulate the BSI on 125 years of tireless work, ensuring quality not only in British society, but across the world. The British Standards Institution is the UK’s national standards body—an independent organisation that develops standards that shape and encourage best practice across myriad professional sectors. The Government’s relationship with the BSI is through a memorandum of understanding, primarily to support the UK standards system, rather than to direct or enforce implementation of standards by businesses. Decisions on adoption and implementation remain with individual organisations, although the Government may play a role in encouraging awareness of those standards to support best practice. In November last year, as we heard, the BSI launched a new voluntary standard entitled “Suicide and the Workplace”. That standard was particularly notable, given that it was not just the UK’s but the world’s first national standard supporting suicide prevention efforts in the workplace—a truly commendable achievement. My ministerial counterpart, the Minister with responsibility for mental health and women’s health, Baroness Gillian Merron, was particularly pleased to speak at the launch of that standard. As with other BSI standards, this voluntary British standard is published as guidance; it is designed to support organisations of any size and across all sectors in strengthening their approach to suicide prevention, intervention and bereavement support in the workplace. On uptake, I was pleased to hear that the standard has been well received so far, with more than 11,000 downloads since its publication in November. It is overwhelming to hear that businesses across the country are putting the standard into practice, including Heathrow airport and Inclusion Education, which have publicly adopted it. The standard is advisory and is intended to be integrated into existing organisational policies and health, safety and wellbeing arrangements, and therefore to be flexible. In terms of supporting its implementation, decisions on how to use it rest with individual organisations, but the Government recognise that some employers may choose to use it as a reference point or benchmark alongside their existing workplace mental health and wellbeing policies. My hon. Friend the Member for Blaydon and Consett knows I am not a Department for Business and Trade Minister, but I am committed to making sure that she is linked in with the appropriate Minister in that Department, particularly around her asks on how smaller and medium-sized enterprises can access and implement the standard and overcome the regulatory and financial hurdles to doing so, and I would be delighted to try to organise that meeting for her.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Mental Health Services · Hansard source

  More

  The case that the hon. Gentleman highlights is indicative of the fact that much work has been done and much more needs to be done. We are providing early intervention for children’s mental health and wellbeing by rolling out mental health support teams, which will happen in every school by 2029. We are investing £13 million to pilot enhanced training for staff, so that they can offer more support to young people with complex needs. We are ensuring that, as we are digitally transforming, children and adults can access talking therapies where required. A lot has been done and there is a lot more to do, and we will carry on doing it.

• 11 Mar 2026 · Disability Equipment Provision · Hansard source

  More

  Mr Betts, it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I start by thanking the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) for securing the debate, as well as all Members who contributed. We, of course, want disabled people to access and experience healthcare services on an equitable footing and to have a healthcare service that is responsive to their needs. That includes making sure that they have the right equipment at the right time to maintain independence for as long as possible, whether that means wheelchairs, mobility aids or other assistive technologies. We recognise the profound impact that delays in receiving disability equipment have on people’s quality of life, and I will set out the action that the Government are taking. Before I do so, however, I want to take a moment to acknowledge the points raised by the hon. Members for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) and for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett), particularly the cases they raised. I will certainly ensure that I take a personal interest in the case described by the hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead and that the relevant DWP Minister also has an opportunity to address that particularly harrowing case. The Liberal Democrat Front Bencher, the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire), asked for an update on the Design for Life statistics on recycling and reusing, and I will get my officials to get back to her on that. We are committed to ensuring that disabled people have access to the services and support that they need. The Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans), asked about our NHS reforms and whether that might be an opportunity to think about better end-to-end commissioning and strategising on the topic. I can assure him that those conversations are being had both in the context of disability and, with regard to special educational needs and disabilities, in the Department for Education. There are a number of topics that, if we are honest with ourselves, have been often neglected in the last couple of decades and have a material impact on the quality of life for disabled people, sometimes for want of very simple changes to practice and, potentially, legislation, so I am very happy to take that on board with the Bill team. The reforms that we are taking forward in the health and social care space will hopefully help us to achieve what I have outlined. The 10-year health plan specifically identifies disabled people as a priority group for the development of neighbourhood healthcare, offering more holistic and ongoing support. We are making £4.6 billion of additional funding available for adult social care in 2028-29, compared with ’25-26, to support the sector in making some of those improvements. In July ’25, the Government announced that they would develop a new plan for disability, setting out a clear vision to break down barriers to opportunity for disabled people. That of course aligns with every Department having a Minister responsible for disability. We meet regularly to discuss challenges, particularly some of the ones highlighted during this debate, which often do not fit neatly into one Department’s purview. As hon. Members will be aware, health and social care are largely devolved across the UK. I will talk mainly about England, but of course I am the representative of a Scottish constituency, like the hon. Member who opened the debate, and he will understand if I just mention that we are committed, through the Barnett formula, to funding the NHS in Scotland, as we are doing in England; there is a £9.1 billion real-terms uplift in the Scottish budget over the period of the spending review. In England, integrated care boards are responsible for commissioning services to meet the health needs of their local population, and responsibility for providing community equipment to disabled people typically falls at the moment, as has been outlined, to local authorities. They have a statutory duty to make arrangements for the provision of community equipment to disabled people in their area. That equipment can be free for the recipient if the person is assessed as having eligible needs. Types of support include equipment to enable people to live more independently, such as grab rails, walking aids and wheelchairs for short-term use. Responsibility for managing the market for these services rests with local authorities. For people with long-term, complex mobility needs, support is provided by the national health service, based on assessed need. That may involve the provision of specialist equipment adapted to the specific needs of the individual, and can include both powered and manual wheelchairs.

• 26 Feb 2026 · Eating Disorders Awareness Week · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Being proactive and following the evidence should be our north star when we are formulating policy; I know that is true of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology. The Royal College of Psychiatrists has been explicit about eating disorders and end-of-life care. Anorexia nervosa is not a terminal illness in its own right. The college’s guidance on medical emergencies in eating disorders was developed precisely to ensure that preventable deaths become a thing of the past. NHS England is clear that no patient with an eating disorder should routinely be placed in palliative care. Our focus must always be on treatment and recovery, and underpinned by the hope of recovery. We also share concerns about the accurate recordings of deaths where eating disorders may have been a contributing factor. The hon. Member for Bath outlined some of her frustrations regarding correspondence with the Ministry of Justice and I would be happy to take up that call on her behalf to make sure that she gets the correspondence that she is entitled to. The statutory medical examiner and coroner system provides a clear framework to ensure that deaths are properly investigated and recorded so that lessons are identified and patient safety is strengthened. Although it is for the coroner to exercise independent judicial discretion to determine what is recorded as the medical cause of death, I can reassure hon. Members that the coroner’s office has been undergoing training to ensure that the recording of deaths associated with eating disorders is done more accurately and proactively. Accurate recording matters, and we will continue to work with our partners, including colleagues in the Ministry of Justice and clinicians, to ensure that not only are the statistics captured, but the learning underpinning those statistics is reflected in genuine improvements to care. Eating disorders are serious and complex mental illnesses that can affect anyone at any age and in any community or family. They require timely treatment, skilled professionals and sustained support thereafter.

• 26 Feb 2026 · Eating Disorders Awareness Week · Hansard source

  More

  I wholeheartedly agree. The Government are committed to ending the revolving door for many conditions—this is an exemplar, in many ways—by joining up care and the streams of information that underpin it. One of our main commitments in our 10-year health plan is to have more joined-up care, to move it from sickness to prevention and to move from hospital into community, where that join-up can happen. This community can thrive only when it is built on a foundation of timely, effective care. That is why we are focused on reforming eating disorder services so that people can access help when they need it, not after their condition has escalated. That approach underpins the new NHS guidance for children and young people’s eating disorder services, published last month, which is clear that care should be timely, joined up and delivered as close to home as possible. As many here know, demand for mental health support, including eating disorder services, rose sharply during the pandemic, and the rise has been sustained thereafter. Although services remain under significant pressure, as a result of the additional investment there are some green shoots in system capacity and capability to better meet rising demand and reduce the waits that hon. Members have described. In December 2025, 83.3% of routine referrals to children and young people’s community eating disorder services and 78.8% of urgent referrals started treatment within four weeks and one week respectively. That is a marked improvement in performance, compared with the situation six months earlier. In June last year, only 72.2% of routine referrals and 63.7% of urgent referrals were seen within four weeks and one week respectively. Although those are encouraging signs, I am under no illusion: too many children and young people are still waiting far too long for support. That is exactly why further reform and delivery are needed. The Government’s long-term approach to mental health reform is set out in the 10-year health plan, which is clear in its direction. It shifts care from hospital to community, from sickness to prevention and, of course, from analogue to digital, which will be so important when it comes to having joined-up care. I assure hon. Members that those shifts are not abstract principles, but practical changes that are already being embedded. I know that they matter deeply for people living with eating disorders, and the families and loved ones who support them. But I recognise that plans alone do not deliver care. Delivery depends on people and having the right workforce with the right skills in the right places. That is why, on top of the workforce plan that will come to fruition in late spring or early summer, we are investing in the workforce. We are committed to providing an additional 8,500 new mental health professionals across child and adult mental health services, to cutting waiting times and to ensuring that people access treatment and support earlier than ever before. We are also working to strengthen skills and capability across the system. NHS England has introduced comprehensive training to ensure that staff across mental and physical health services can recognise eating disorders early and respond safely and effectively. That training supports clinicians working not only in the community but in primary and, crucially, acute care settings, where I used to work. I often saw such patients on my acute general surgical receiving ward rounds. The training includes specialist programmes, including the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ eating disorders credential, expanded access to family-based therapies, cognitive behavioural therapy for eating disorders, and dedicated training on ARFID, which the hon. Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Dr Johnson) mentioned. That work is about giving staff the skills, confidence and, crucially, clarity they need to deliver safe, high-quality care and reduce some of the avoidable harm that we have discussed today. I am pleased to say that funding for children and young people’s eating disorder services has increased significantly, from £46.7 million in 2017-18 to an actual spend of £106.3 million in 2024-25. With that extra funding, we have focused on enhancing the capacity of community eating disorder teams across the country, because we know that timely, effective care leads to better outcomes, supports recovery and helps to prevent conditions escalating to the point at which hospital admission becomes inevitable. When admission is necessary, stronger community care can reduce length of stay when it is safe. We recognise the concerns that in-patient capacity remains under pressure in some parts of our country. There are reports of individuals being discharged at very low body mass due to bed availability, as the hon. Member for Bath highlighted. Discharge decisions must always be about clinical judgment and patient safety, not capacity constraints. NHS England reassures me and continues to work with providers and integrated care boards to ensure that sufficient specialist provision and safe step-down pathways will be in place.

• 24 Feb 2026 · People with Down’s Syndrome: Sport and Health · Hansard source

  More

  Every child with a disability should have the opportunity to reap the health and wellbeing benefits of being active. We are working across health, education and sports to break down barriers to physical activity, including for children with Down’s syndrome. That includes ensuring that they have access to inclusive, sensory-rich activities that they can enjoy with friends, families and carers.

• 2 Dec 2025 · Pandemics: Support for People with Autism · Hansard source

  More

  I will have to go back and check that particular sub-group of flagging and get back to my hon. Friend, but I think the point he makes is that, wherever possible, we should be identifying those groups that have specific communication needs, by virtue of either their own personal health or social needs, or the needs of those they are looking after. He makes a very valid point and I will be delighted to write to him with a more detailed response than I can give at the moment. More broadly, I have heard concerns about support for autistic people. I reassure my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich that we are committed to supporting autistic people, who should have the right support in place, tailored to their individual needs. Our 10-year health plan sets out an ambitious reform agenda to transform the NHS and rightly make it fit for the future. That future must at its core include early intervention and support for autistic people and those with specific needs. We are working with the Department for Education on reforms to the special educational needs and disabilities system, ensuring that joined-up support is available across education and health, including for autistic children and young people. We are also taking steps to improve access to adult social care services for those who need them. To build consensus on plans for a national care service, Baroness Casey is chairing an independent commission to shape the medium and long-term landscape reforms needed, and we have been putting the core foundations in place to facilitate that. That includes strengthening joined-up care between health and social care, so that people experience more integrated, person-centred care, including through the development of neighbourhood health services. I have also heard about the impact of the pandemic on autistic people’s mental health and wellbeing. We know that autistic people are, sadly, disproportionately impacted by mental ill health and face challenges in accessing services in relation to their mental health. We are taking steps to address that, including raising awareness and understanding of autism within health and social care systems. We have been rolling out the Oliver McGowan mandatory training on learning disability and autism to support Care Quality Commission-registered providers to meet their statutory requirements and ensure that their staff receive specific training on learning disability and autism. NHS England has been rolling out additional training services across its mental health services, and has published guidance for mental health services on meeting the needs of autistic adults and guidance on adaptations of NHS talking therapies specifically designed for autistic people. I am sure that my hon. Friend is aware that the House of Lords special inquiry Committee on the Autism Act 2009 published its report and recommendations for Government on 23 November. I understand that his constituent Ivan contributed to the inquiry, and I personally thank him and others for sharing their valuable insights and experiences, despite all the trauma that they have been through. The Government are carefully considering the Committee’s recommendations on the next autism strategy and support for autistic people, and we will respond formally in due course. I end by reiterating my thanks to my hon. Friend and his constituent Ivan. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) and the hon. Members for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron), for Strangford (Jim Shannon), for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) and for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) for their contributions. Whether through Exercise Pegasus, looking at how we can better co-create guidance with vulnerable groups, using better guidance tailored for specific communities, using digital flags on health records, or indeed better mandatory training, I give my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich this assurance: no longer will disabled people or people with specific or additional needs be treated as an afterthought. They will be at the forefront of our minds when planning future pandemic training and preparedness—and when executing that preparedness, should we be so unfortunate as to suffer another pandemic. He has my assurance, and I am once again grateful to him for securing this debate. Question put and agreed to.

• 26 Nov 2025 · Children of Alcoholics · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate the hon. Member for Mid Norfolk (George Freeman) on securing this important debate, in particular during what must be an unimaginably difficult week for him. I think I speak for all of us when I say that we send him our love and sympathy. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) for sharing his powerful personal story, and the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and my hon. Friend the Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) for their thoughtful contributions. I will be very happy, once the APPG has been convened, to liaise with the hon. Member for Mid Norfolk and the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton), who has responsibility for public health, to see what form of meeting can be arranged. Alcoholism is a tragedy that blights communities across the United Kingdom, including in my constituency of Glasgow South West and the west of Scotland. Having practised as a medical doctor for more than 20 years, I have seen it, including in some of the transplant patients who have arrived across my operating table. As much as I love my job as a surgeon, I would love nothing more than for those transplants to never be needed again. I want to reassure colleagues that this brief sits not just with my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire, but with all Ministers across Government, who are rightly focused on raising the healthiest generation of children in history. We want to support children whose parents have alcohol problems, but we also want to support their parents to get better. Although not all children of parents with an alcohol problem will experience harm, they are clearly at far greater risk and, as we have heard, far too many of them will have their childhood scarred by their parents’ drinking. In 2024-25, 14% of child social worker assessments cited parental alcohol use, and in 2023-24 alcohol or drug use was identified in 43% of child safeguarding practice reviews where a child was seriously harmed or, sadly, died. Children growing up in these environments are more likely to face additional challenges, such as parental mental health problems and sometimes, unfortunately, domestic abuse. The trauma from such experiences can last well into adulthood, which means that the cycle can repeat, with the trauma passed on through multiple generations. We must do everything we can to break that cycle. As we have heard, alcoholism can affect anyone, but at times it hits hardest in some of our deprived communities. That is why from April next year, the Government will be rolling out Best Start family hubs to every local authority. Those hubs will provide a high-quality service for parents, and will focus on early child development and the digital resources to facilitate that. They will be open to all and based in communities where alcoholism is most prevalent, ensuring that services reach the children and families who are likely to benefit most from them. The Government have also confirmed that we are giving vulnerable families and children better access to local support services. Our strategy is based, first, on breaking the cycle of late intervention and, secondly, on helping more children and families to stay safely together as a unit. We are doing this through the national roll-out of the family help multi-agency child protection and family group decision-making reforms, which will be delivered through the Families First Partnership programme led by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education. The programme’s funding amounts to £2.4 billion over the next three years. To help identify vulnerable children and families affected by parental alcohol problems who need a helping hand, my Department will support local authorities with an additional range of resources, including local prevalence and treatment data, and child safeguarding guidance for alcohol and drug treatment services. We are doing this for children and their families, but we must also target our support to make a sustainable difference to pregnant women with alcohol problems. Timely and effective treatment is key, because drinking in pregnancy leads to long-term harm for babies—for example, foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, which has already been highlighted in this debate. Unfortunately, the more that women drink, the greater the risk. That is why the UK chief medical officer’s guideline is that if a woman is pregnant or thinks she might become pregnant, the safest approach is not to drink at all. It is a genuine tragedy that pregnant women and mothers with alcohol problems are sometimes the most stigmatised and harshly judged people in our society. That means it is incredibly difficult for those women to speak out about their issues and to let services know that they have children, which prevents women, children and families from getting the help they deserve. We cannot forget that many women who drink during pregnancy come from homes where their own parents were dependent on alcohol and are often at the sharpest end of not only inequality, but complex and multiple other needs. Many of them were victims of trauma and abuse in their own childhood. That is why the Government are committed to reducing stigma, improving the quality of treatment and making support available to every woman who needs it. First, we are piloting local approaches to reduce stigma among doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals. Secondly, we will soon publish the UK’s first clinical guidelines for alcohol treatment that include advice for supporting pregnant women and parents to stop or safely slow down their alcohol use. Thirdly, the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England are finalising the co-occurring mental health and substance use delivery framework, which will outline the commitments that we are making to improve integration of alcohol and drug treatment with mental health services at a national level. Fourthly, we plan to publish guidance on how treatment providers can better support and improve service provision for women. We will work with local commissioners to ensure that they consider in their drug and alcohol treatment commissioning plans the specific needs of pregnant women and parents. We are also continuing to invest in improvements to local alcohol treatment services, which faced significant cuts followed by a decade of disinvestment. Just last week, the Government announced an investment of £13.4 billion—a 5.6% cash increase—over the next three years in local authorities’ vital public health work through the consolidated public health grant. That includes the overall £1 billion of drug and alcohol treatment and recovery improvement grants over the next three years. But treatment alone is not enough to improve outcomes for children. The evidence suggests that alcohol treatment, combined with support to help parents raise their kids, can increase the likelihood of recovery from alcohol dependency, reduce the risk of child neglect or abuse and, crucially, keep families together. I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to this debate. It has given me the chance to outline how the Government are laser-focused on improving outcomes for children from all kinds of backgrounds who find themselves in these situations—children who, through no fault of their own, were born to parents who suffer from alcohol problems. I hope I have demonstrated that our approach is based not on stigmatising, but on keeping families together. That is why our strategy is based on Best Start family hubs and the Families First Partnership programme, so that we can make sure that parents in alcohol treatment services also receive vital parenting and family support. The Department for Education has released statutory guidance called “Working Together to Safeguard Children”, and I want to pick out one line from it: “Nothing is more important than children’s welfare.” That could not be more true. Everything we are doing across Government is aimed at improving children’s health and protecting child welfare, so that every child can thrive in a loving, safe and stable home. Let me end by speaking directly about the hon. Member for Mid Norfolk. Today he has spoken not only in this place, but to the nation. In doing so, he has ensured that more Members and citizens of our nation will now look, acknowledge and see below the line, so that together we can ensure that more children do not continue to suffer in silence. Question put and agreed to .

• 19 Nov 2025 · Draft Health and Care Act 2022 (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Health and Care Act 2022 (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2025. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. A copy of the draft regulations was laid before the House on 21 October. There are estimated to be around 47,000 people in the UK with Down’s syndrome. Despite existing legal duties and frameworks, those people face real challenges in accessing the care and support they need to live the lives they want to in their own communities. This Government are determined to set that right. Through the implementation of the Down Syndrome Act 2022, aligned with the overarching aims of our 10-year health plan for England, we are striving to improve the life outcomes for people with Down’s syndrome by improving their access to services, raising awareness and understanding of their needs, and breaking down the barriers to opportunity that they and other disabled people face. The draft regulations will make a technical but necessary amendment to the Down Syndrome Act to support its effective implementation, and it is right that they should be given full scrutiny in Committee. I will begin by setting out what the Down Syndrome Act requires. Under the Act, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is required to give guidance to relevant authorities in health, social care, education and housing services on what they should be doing to meet the needs of people with Down’s syndrome. Relevant authorities must have due regard to the final statutory guidance, once published. This Government want disabled people’s access to, and experience of, healthcare services to be equitable and effective. The guidance under the Down Syndrome Act supports that aim by raising awareness of, and bringing together in one place, the practical steps that organisations should take to meet the needs of people with Down’s syndrome. It also helps to clarify the support and services that people with Down’s syndrome can expect to receive. On 5 November, we launched a public consultation on draft guidance under the Down Syndrome Act. Work to develop the draft guidance has involved significant engagement with people with lived experience and, importantly, with the organisations that support them. The consultation presents a further opportunity for people with lived experience and their families to share their views. We expect the guidance to improve support for people with Down’s syndrome and for those with other, similar conditions. In order for the guidance to deliver improvements for those people, it needs to be implemented effectively across the range of communities that it serves. On 9 May 2023, NHS England published statutory guidance stating that every integrated care board should identify a member of its board to lead on supporting that ICB to perform its functions effectively in the interests of people with Down’s syndrome. The NHS England guidance also states that ICBs should have a lead for learning disability and autism, and a lead for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities. It will be important for ICB leads to work collaboratively across the integrated care system, with local authority, public health, education and wider partners. The consultation on the draft guidance will help us to understand whether the guidance is clear, informative and useful to relevant authorities in carrying out their legislative requirements in support of people with Down’s syndrome. We will use the feedback received to ensure the guidance is fit for purpose. I now turn to what the draft regulations will do. Under the Down Syndrome Act, relevant authorities must have due regard to the final statutory guidance when exercising their relevant functions. The Act does not create any functions beyond that duty. The schedule to the Act specifies the relevant authorities that must have due regard to the guidance and the specific functions of those bodies to which the guidance applies. As drafted, the schedule does not include NHS England or ICBs. Rather, it refers to the National Health Service Commissioning Board, which was the former name of NHS England, and to clinical commissioning groups, which were the commissioning bodies in place at the time the Down Syndrome Act was passed. These draft regulations seek to bring the legislation up to date by replacing references to CCGs with ICBs, and references to the National Health Service Commissioning Board with NHS England. The changes are required because the Health and Social Care Act 2022 made provision for the abolition of CCGs and replaced them with ICBs, and renamed the National Health Service Commissioning Board as NHS England. The purpose of that change is to bring ICBs and NHS England within scope of the Down Syndrome Act duty to have due regard to the guidance. Final guidance issued under the Down Syndrome Act will not be published until these changes come into force. We intend to publish the guidance before the planned abolition of NHS England comes into effect. We understand that the ongoing reforms across Government affect the timing and content of the final guidance, and its content after publication. We will keep the final guidance under review, and it will be updated to reflect the latest policy and legislative frameworks as and when necessary. The Down’s syndrome guidance will not be statutory for those not specified in the schedule to the Down Syndrome Act, which means that persons who are not relevant authorities are under no obligation to have due regard to the guidance. It is therefore important that we change the wording in the Down Syndrome Act now to ensure that the guidance will apply to current relevant authorities. The change will also ensure that the legislation is in alignment with NHS England’s statutory guidance on the ICB leads on Down’s syndrome. ICB leads are responsible for the implementation of the guidance under the Down Syndrome Act. It is therefore critical that they are referenced in the legislation itself. The regulations will come into force on the day after the date on which they are made. The rationale is to ensure that the duty under the Down Syndrome Act to give guidance to relevant authorities applies to the correct authorities. The regulations will have no material effect until the final guidance is published. We therefore do not believe it necessary to engage with or notify the public further on these changes. By making important updates to the Down Syndrome Act, these regulations will provide vital assurance that the guidance will be implemented effectively, ensuring that it can achieve the aim of improving the life outcomes of those with Down’s syndrome. I commend this statutory instrument to the Committee.

• 22 Oct 2025 · Mental Health and Hoarding · Hansard source

  More

  I sincerely thank my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Erdington (Paulette Hamilton), who is vice-chair of the Health and Social Care Committee, for securing this debate. I pay tribute to her for her work on that Committee, on which she has consistently championed the voices of the unheard, and for her 30 years’ service in the NHS as a district nurse. As she was speaking, I recalled that, as a medical student at the University of Glasgow, I had the pleasure of spending a lot of time shadowing district nurses. I always found them to have the perfect mixture of clinical acumen and a sixth sense of something being not quite right. She displays those attributes in abundance. My hon. Friend has been true to form in raising the issue of hoarding. This disorder is, by definition, kept from public view. Although it is often overlooked, it has a profound impact on the lives of the affected, their families and their carers, and, of course, on local services. Too many suffer in silence. I thank Hoarding UK, Clouds End and Clutterers Anonymous, to name just a few of the charities that do so much to support people up and down the country. For too long, hoarding has been seen as something quirky, or perhaps even comical, but the disorder is neither a joke nor a rarity; it is a complex and often misunderstood condition that can have devastating consequences for people’s mental and physical health. Often, it is a portent to investigating further mental wellbeing and illness. Estimates vary, but research suggests that between 2% and 3% of the UK population, as my hon. Friend adumbrated, may be affected by hoarding behaviours. These are often associated with traumatic life experiences such as bereavement, divorce or eviction. People who hoard can experience deep emotional distress, guilt and anxiety. The clutter in their homes often represents emotional pain, memories or attempts to regain control.

• 21 Oct 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  In September, Hampshire Hospitals NHS foundation trust reported step-down intermediate care capacity as the primary reason for discharge, and at Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS trust, the discharge figure was 13% lower than the average. As important as intermediate care is, we know from the evidence that getting home is better; we are putting record amounts of money into the better care fund to make that possible. [ Official Report , 3 November 2025; Vol. 774, c. 5WC.] (Correction)