Proceeding contribution from Lord Risby (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 7 February 2008. It occurred during Topical debate on NHS Staffing.
NHS Staffing
My hon. Friend has always made an enormous contribution in the House on health matters, in which he takes a close interest. His question is about what is commonly described as the poor relation of the health services. I do not have specific statistics about the problem, but I am sure that he agrees that one of the tragedies in how mental health has been handled, from a financial and back-up point of view, is that many individuals who are tragically caught up in the vortex of mental ill health land up in the criminal justice system, where they remain for good. Nothing is more tragic in personal terms; it is also very destructive for society as a whole. I welcome the 5.5 per cent. increase that all PCTs are receiving in 2008-09, but it does not sufficiently address the problem that I have outlined. I have met officials at the Department of Health on several occasions to discuss the funding given to Suffolk, and have spent a great deal of time examining the funding formula that distributes funding to PCTs. The strategic health authority has accepted that we get a particularly raw deal. Rural areas such as Suffolk—many of my hon. Friends will be in exactly the same position—have been adversely impacted by a funding formula that discriminates against them. I raised the issue at a meeting with a former Secretary of State for Health, and she agreed that if the NHS structures in Suffolk and elsewhere were in financial balance by last spring, she would re-examine the problem of rurality as part of the NHS funding formula. I hope that the reason why the advisory committee on resource allocation has requested more time to finalise its review of the resource allocation formula is that it is seriously examining the rurality factor. I eagerly await the report, which we hope will finally be published this summer. I hope that the revenue allocation in my area will be considerably greater. The impact of the cuts on staffing is just one manifestation of the negative effect that the skewed funding formula has had in Suffolk and other more rural parts of the country. At the level at which most people have contact with the NHS, I fear that we are seeing a similar discriminatory effect. Haverhill, which is the largest town in my constituency, is being affected by the operation of the Carr-Hill formula, especially through its effect on the weighted list size of each practice. That has caused considerable distress to my constituents. I touched on the national funding formula and the fact that it has thrown up various anomalies over the years. Now we have an anomalous situation closer to home. For most people, contact with the NHS is most frequently made through their local GP surgery. A general practitioner is invariably the first port of call for people seeking help and GPs are hugely trusted in the local community. Yet the application of the centrally determined Carr-Hill formula has resulted in the town in my constituency which is the largest and most rapidly expanding in the whole county experiencing cuts of £280,000 for the local GP practices. That has meant that those practices will have to cut back, possibly remove staff, and make additional savings. People read the huge headline rates of supposed increases in spending in the NHS and they hear about the increased commitment by the Government, but they cannot marry that up with the fact that they see cuts in the local hospitals, beds being removed, staff given the sack, and the GPs in the biggest town in my constituency up in arms because they are faced with substantial cuts—about £280,000. The community has come together in an unprecedented way. Petitions of more than 10,000 people have been delivered to No. 10 Downing street and to the House. People cherish the NHS and want it to work. They cannot understand why such situations continuously arise. Having to deal with the consequences is hugely undermining for those who so loyally work in the NHS. I read Lord Darzi's proposals with great interest. In the report published last autumn, he proposed that each PCT should have a new GP-led health centre. I am delighted that an initiative is under way in Suffolk that may bring one of those new walk-in centres that is open from 8 am to 8 pm to Haverhill in my constituency. However, that does not offset the fact that one of the consequences of the budget cut in Haverhill, with its impact on staffing, is that some of the satellite surgeries that the GPs were able to operate in the villages surrounding the town will be cut, notably in the village of Kedington. People have got used to having a satellite surgery and they value it because public transport is limited. Because of staff pressures resulting from the cuts, the surgery there will be cut again. That undermines people's confidence in the NHS. They keep asking where all the money has gone. Such is the outrage in the village, where the GPs are held in high regard, that we are holding a public meeting. I will do everything in my power to encourage the survival of the GP surgeries, because they are held in great esteem. During the past 10 years the whole of the NHS has suffered badly, but in Suffolk it has been hit particularly hard. As the Minister said, the NHS marks its 60th anniversary this July. It was based on the founding principle of providing health care for all citizens and it is very much cherished, yet if the Minister has listened to what I said—I have tried to cite the statistics as accurately as possible—she will accept that people question whether that principle is still upheld. They do not understand what is happening. Our hospitals are at bursting point. There is no question but that staff morale in the NHS is very low, we do not have enough beds, patients are being discharged too early—not for clinical reasons, but because of the target-driven culture—and the obsessive bureaucracy is impacting on the lives of our doctors and nurses. When patients go into hospital, there is the danger, as a consequence of superbugs, that they will leave in worse health than when they were admitted. There is the prospect that some of my constituents will be without a local GP surgery. As the elderly population grows, the situation will become worse. In conclusion, yes, there has been an increase in staffing overall, although recently that has not been the pattern locally. Yes, more money has gone into the NHS and technology has improved. But my constituents share the concerns of doctors, nurses, community nurses and ancillary workers about what is going on in the NHS. Despite all the good intentions that may exist, morale is probably at its lowest point in the history of the NHS. That is a terrible indictment of what the Government have done.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 471 c1161-3
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Health professions NHS Staff Temporary employment Training
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:50:34 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_444279
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_444279
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_444279