Wes Streeting MP: speeches

Speeches

• 14 Apr 2026 · Hospital Trusts: Performance · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her question and for the work that she has been doing on behalf of the people of Thurrock to speak up consistently for improving services and to expose failures at her local trust. As I told listeners to BBC Essex this morning, I will always report back on the things that this Government are doing well but I will also acknowledge where we are not seeing improvement fast enough. I am sorry to say that Mid and South Essex is one such trust, despite the best efforts of frontline staff. That is why we announced that Mid and South Essex is one of the first providers to be put in the new intensive recovery programme. We are sending in teams of clinical experts to identify the root causes of failure and a new chief executive will take up post shortly and get a grip on the issues at the trust so that we deliver for patients.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Hospital Trusts: Performance · Hansard source

  More

  Under Labour, the NHS is on the road to recovery: with an extra £26 billion invested, 2,000 extra GPs and 100 community diagnostic centres now open weekdays and weekends, waiting lists are coming down and patient satisfaction is going up—lots done, but so much more to do to ensure that that improvement is felt everywhere. Where trusts underperform, we will send crack teams of top clinicians into those struggling trusts to cut waiting times faster. No more turning a blind eye to failure: this Government, unlike our predecessors, will do whatever it takes to improve the NHS in every part of the country—lots done; lots more to do.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Hospital Trusts: Performance · Hansard source

  More

  I think that was a rare acknowledgment from the Conservative Benches that things are finally moving in the right direction, thanks to the work of this Labour Government. I am very grateful for the hon. Gentleman’s support. He is absolutely right that we need to provide digital support. That is why we have the biggest capital allocation in the history of the NHS and we continue to press on with the technological improvements and data infrastructure that is needed to provide the improvements that staff are working so hard to deliver.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Maternity Care · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right to present those issues and to be honest about the challenges that have been raised in his local trust. I assure him that following an inspection by the CQC, NHS trusts take action to address the recommendations cited in the report. Already, £40 million in funding has been allocated to Wythenshawe hospital to ensure that safety issues are addressed, with work scheduled for completion by 2028. [ Official Report , 27 April 2026; Vol. 784, c. 4WC.] (Correction) In addition, through the new maternity and neonatal taskforce, the first meeting of which I have already chaired, we will act swiftly to translate the final recommendations of the independent investigation into a new national action plan so that services improve in my hon. Friend’s part of the country and across the whole of England.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Maternity Care · Hansard source

  More

  We are investing in the maternity estate, and I am always ready to acknowledge improvements, but for the avoidance of doubt, I am not here to protect the professional blushes of NHS leaders and staff where services fall short. I am here to protect patients, and in this area, over and above any other, I will continue to put that principle first.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Maternity Care · Hansard source

  More

  There is so much evidence to underpin the importance of continuity of care. I do not want to get ahead of the recommendations of the Amos investigation, but there is much to commend what the right hon. Gentleman says. Even with the best planning, the challenge for maternity units is that they are often both elective and emergency, with women arriving when they are not necessarily expected to, so we have to bear those considerations in mind, but the idea of women and partners knowing the team that will be responsible for their care in advance is a compelling one.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Maternity Care · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for raising that absolutely horrific case; my sincere condolences go to the family for the loss of this poor baby. No patient should ever believe that someone is a trained professional, only to discover that they have no formal qualifications. This Government are protecting the professional title of nurse, so that no other families have to endure the suffering of his constituents. We will shortly be seeking widespread input to get that right, and we will be making changes in this Parliament. We will absolutely be addressing the issues that have been raised as a direct result of this tragedy.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Maternity Care · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for raising this issue. I do not want to pre-empt the Amos investigation. I think there is an issue with the presence of consultants and other staff who are meant to be on-call and available, and we need to address that. The purpose of the investigation is to produce a strong evidence base and then a clear set of actions to provide much-needed clarity in an area that has been drowning in recommendations and needs clear direction. I would be surprised if the issue of appropriate staffing were not mentioned by Baroness Amos.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Maternity Care · Hansard source

  More

  I remain deeply concerned by the state of the maternity services that we inherited. Although the majority of births go well, I know through the courage of families and concerned staff of the devastating impact that comes from failures in care. That is why I asked Baroness Amos to chair an independent investigation into maternity and neonatal care. However, that has not stopped us from acting now, with an extra 2,000 midwives, over £149 million invested to address critical safety risks on the maternity and neonatal estate, and a £25 million boost for trusts to tackle causes of maternal death, enhance bereavement services and improve triage services. We are already making progress—lots done, but I would be the first to say on this issue: so much more to do.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Muslims: NHS · Hansard source

  More

  It is vital that all forms of discrimination in the NHS are tackled, including Islamophobia and anti-Muslim hatred. As a former chair of the all-party parliamentary group on British Muslims, I am delighted that the Government have adopted a definition of anti-Muslim hostility that we will use to tackle this prejudice across the NHS, including in training for the NHS’s 1.5 million staff. My hon. Friend will know that I have serious concerns about the effectiveness of regulators in tackling racism, and we will be taking further action to ensure high standards, conduct and behaviour are upheld, so that the NHS is safe for all staff and patients.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Muslims: NHS · Hansard source

  More

  Those statistics are shocking and a stark reminder that the NHS is not immune from the prejudices at large in wider society. All Muslim staff and patients—indeed, people of all faiths—should feel safe and confident as patients and staff in the NHS. As my hon. Friend knows, I am awaiting the review being conducted by Lord Mann. As well as looking at antisemitism, it will include recommendations that I have no doubt will apply in tackling Islamophobia and racism more generally. I am very happy to meet my hon. Friend and I do meet, and would be very happy to meet again, the BIMA to discuss how we tackle this pernicious hatred in our national health service and what more may need to be done, in addition to any recommendations Lord Mann makes.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Muslims: NHS · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is right. I only wish that I could tell him that it was the case that Jewish patients and staff are always being treated in the way that they deserve to be, but unfortunately I have heard first-hand accounts of Jewish people being afraid to disclose their race and faith when completing forms. That is not just a question of indignity; it is a question of safety because risk factors, particularly those related to genetics, need to be taken into account by the NHS, and it is about the provision of things that lead to people having a dignified and high-quality experience, such as the provision of food. I am afraid to say that I have also heard about shocking racism experienced by Jewish staff in the NHS from patients and from other NHS staff. That has got to stop. Finally, all staff in the NHS have a right to speak and express opinions in a democracy, but all of them must always ask themselves, especially when writing on social media, “Will a particular comment or a particular action make my patients feel more safe or less safe in my hands? Will they question my commitment to treating all people fairly and equally or not?” That is the standard on which too many doctors have fallen short, and that is before I get to the explicit, vile racists whom we are taking on.

• 14 Apr 2026 · NHS Waiting Lists · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend, and join her in congratulating Stephen and the whole team at University Hospitals of Derby and Burton trust on their hard work to drive down waiting lists and waiting times. We are not complacent; we have set ambitious targets and invested in modernisation to simplify pathways, increase clinical capacity and improve patients’ experience. We have managed to cut waiting lists despite resident doctors’ strike action—I fear we may have to continue doing that. Through our investment and modernisation, waiting lists and waiting times are coming down, and we have shown that the NHS is on the road to recovery. Our foot is on the accelerator, with lots done, but lots more to do.

• 14 Apr 2026 · NHS Waiting Lists · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that we need to see more services moving out of hospital and into the community. That is why I am proud that we are announcing a new wave of community diagnostic centres and expanding lots of existing provision, as well as improving same-day emergency care and urgent treatment centres in hospitals. He has raised the issue of the Melton Mowbray site; I am sure the local commissioners responsible for that will want to look at it, but I also know that I owe him a meeting, so I will follow up with him directly.

• 14 Apr 2026 · NHS Waiting Lists · Hansard source

  More

  The Chair of the Health Committee raises a very important point, and—not least given the timeliness of the issue—I would be very happy to meet her very soon.

• 14 Apr 2026 · NHS Waiting Lists · Hansard source

  More

  We inherited from the Conservatives an NHS facing the worst crisis in its history, with waiting lists at a record 7.6 million and public satisfaction at record lows. This Labour Government are getting the NHS back on its feet and making it fit for the future. We have delivered record numbers of appointments, tests and surgeries. Since we took office, waiting lists have been down to the lowest level in nearly three and a half years, and we are driving modernisation through our 10-year plan. Lots has been done, but there is so much more to do with a Labour Government.

• 14 Apr 2026 · NHS Waiting Lists · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my hon. Friend for all the work he is doing, including with our Labour team in Worthing, to improve the health of people across his constituency. I congratulate staff at University Hospitals Sussex on the progress that they have made in bringing waiting lists down. To help them to go further, I am delighted to announce that my hon. Friend’s local community diagnostic centre in Southlands hospital will benefit from a new multimillion-pound MRI scanner to drive down waiting times, including for MSK patients. We are combining investment with modernisation to send crack teams of top clinicians to MSK community services, drive down waiting times and improve outcomes. That is the difference that a Labour Government make.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Resident Doctors: Industrial Action · Hansard source

  More

  It is frankly breathtaking hypocrisy. It rather looks like doctors in their ivory tower saying one thing, and lecturing us about what is and is not affordable, but when it comes to how their subs are spent and how their own union behaves towards its own staff, not being prepared to pay them. I have been very complimentary about the officers who have been engaged with Ministers and my officials in recent weeks to try to get this deal over the line; so have BMA staff. I am stunned by the BMA’s unwillingness to practise what it preaches. I will not be joining resident doctors on the picket line. I should have declared, Madam Deputy Speaker, that I am GMB member, so if there is one picket line that I will be visiting during the doctors’ strikes, it may well be that one.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Resident Doctors: Industrial Action · Hansard source

  More

  If the committee had ever taken me up on my offer to meet the entire committee, I might be able to answer the question, but since it has never done so, I do not know. It is for resident doctors to decide, based on what I have set out, if the committee’s rejection of this offer is reasonable. Given the material benefits that the offer would bring to resident doctors in a matter of days—an additional 1,000 jobs and significant pay uplifts—and what that would mean for the next few years, I have to be clear that this is our best and final offer. We cannot go any further. If I may say so, we are at a point where the public would judge that we have gone as far as we can; I think quite a lot of people in the country who are watching would say that we have gone further than we should. I do not take that lightly. Resident doctors should not look a gift horse in the mouth, and I hope that they will make those representations to their committee.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Resident Doctors: Industrial Action · Hansard source

  More

  The Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee is absolutely spot on. I am relieved to report that I was doing exactly what she mentions only last Friday; I was walking the corridors of Queen’s hospital in Romford. I was there in January as well, seeing the worst of the situation. I have been spending time on the frontline in the places that were under the most pressure, just as I did last winter. I went along, not to look down my nose at people, but to listen, and to see at first hand what was happening, why it was happening, and what we need to do differently. The team at Queen’s hospital can really take pride in what they have achieved, but we have to sustain that progress. Last week, there were no trollies on the corridor, and in February they saved 10,000 corridor hours. That is thanks to brilliant frontline staff and senior clinical leadership on the front door, and we will see that again during strikes. There is a certain irony about the fact that during resident doctors’ strikes, urgent and emergency care improves, because we have more experienced, senior clinical decision makers in urgent and emergency care. There is something to learn from that. I do not say that to denigrate resident doctors for a moment—they are learning and building their experience, and we do not want to lose that—but we are seeing that improvements can be made, and have to be made everywhere. We have to see this as a priority, because corridor care can never be the safest care, and it is never dignified care.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Resident Doctors: Industrial Action · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the shadow Secretary of State for his response and questions. Beneath some of the criticism of the Government was a consistent message about the unreasonable and unnecessary position of the BMA, but let me address his criticism none the less. The shadow Secretary of State accused me of “boasting” yesterday about the progress this Government are making on the NHS. For once, I cannot say we are following the pattern of our predecessors, because of course, they did not make any progress. From the moment they entered government, we saw the NHS begin to slide in the worst direction, to the extent that we went into a modern health emergency—the pandemic—woefully underprepared, leaving our country more damaged as a result. I am proud of the progress we are making. We know that what we have seen in terms of results and patient satisfaction are grounds for optimism, not cause for complacency. What we are trying to do as a Government is absolutely essential for the country, to give it back an NHS that is there for people where they need it, when they need it. That is why the BMA’s position is both disappointing and self-defeating for all of us. The shadow Secretary of State talked about the approach I took in opposition. There is a difference between the approach that this Government have taken and the approach of our Conservative predecessors. We have always been prepared to get around the table; we never close the door. As I said from the other side of the House, the power to end strikes does sit with the Government when they are willing to compromise, willing to negotiate and willing to treat the workforce with respect. That is what this Government have done, in contrast to our Conservative predecessors, which is why it is so disappointing that with a deal available—a good deal—the BMA is turning away. The BMA should reflect not just on the contrast with the past, but on the contrast with the future. There is no more pro-NHS, pro-doctor Health Secretary or Government waiting in the wings. I am not even sure that the alternative is a Conservative Health Secretary; that person may well come from Reform UK—the party whose Members occasionally turn up and sit in the corner, when they can be bothered and when they are not flouncing out in a hissy fit. Catch them on a good day and Reform Members may even say the quiet bit out loud: they do not believe in the NHS. They do not believe in it as a public service free at the point of use, and they are certainly not going to treat the BMA or resident doctors with more respect or generosity than a Labour Government. I think the BMA needs to reflect on that. The shadow Secretary of State asked about affordability. One of the great things about the deal that we agreed is that it is affordable because it involves productivity gains—not just the productivity gains that we have already achieved in the NHS, the target being 2% and the reality that we have achieved 2.7%, but the productivity gains built into the pay structure reform. The shadow Secretary of State asked about the jobs. I will be honest, and I am sure NHS chief executives will want to say more about this. The fact is that I and Jim Mackey have had to do a considerable degree of persuading and arm-twisting to persuade NHS trusts to create additional specialty training places, because they have not been convinced of their necessity or utility. Part of their reservation has been about the conduct of resident doctors and the BMA. I have had a hard job to do to sell that. Those jobs will not materialise if the BMA rejects this deal, I am afraid. There is a not a “something for nothing” culture here. I say to the crab people who still believe that they are pursuing a really effective “bank and build” strategy that they should look at what they are confronting now, and look their members and their colleagues in their eye. This is not bank and build any longer; this is a high-and-dry strategy, and it is not going to work. That is why it is important that we end this dispute and that we do it together, in the spirit of partnership. There is still time to do that—there is still a week. The door is not closed; the offer is still there, and I urge them to take it before it goes.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Resident Doctors: Industrial Action · Hansard source

  More

  Pay structure reform and future pay are linked to the DDRB, which is an independent pay review body; its recommendations are one of the things that the BMA wanted the deal to be shaped around. The Government’s position on minimum service levels has been clear. The hon. Gentleman sets out an alternative position from the Conservative party. I think the BMA should look at that, and judge whether it would be better to do a deal with this Government and move forward constructively. Does it honestly think that if it hampers NHS progress, and goes on endless strikes over the coming years, it will have a better Government to work with at the end of this? I do not think so. I ought to say one final thing, which we should take really seriously. I have been thinking about this issue in the context of the covid inquiry report, and where we are in terms of threats to this country, the war in Iran, and the war in Ukraine. This country was more exposed during the pandemic than it might have been if the NHS had been in better shape. This country faces some serious threats in the world, and the NHS is not in good enough shape. In that context, we have to start thinking about whether the actions of the BMA are tolerable.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Resident Doctors: Industrial Action · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for his support in trying to influence a more constructive approach, for the advice that he has given me and members of the resident doctors committee, and for the experience that he brings to these exchanges. He is right to praise Jack Fletcher for the constructive approach that he and his officers have taken. It has not been easy, but I know that officials have enjoyed the constructive engagement, and I thank enormously the officials who have worked tirelessly on this. I think all those involved in the discussions, on both sides of the table, are disappointed by the outcome, and that is why I urge the BMA to seize the offer before it is too late. My hon. Friend talks about other changes, such as to placements and rotations. I think that BMA officers recognise my desire to not only do this deal, but to create a new business as usual with the BMA, where we have people around the table on a regular basis looking at what we can do to improve the health service for patients and staff and to make real progress on those issues. We cannot do that if we are in conflict. That is the tragedy of the position we find ourselves in. I think we have built trust through engagement and dialogue with the BMA committee officers. It is only disappointing that members of the committee are not prepared to get around the same table as me, because if they did, they might realise the sincerity and the opportunity.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Resident Doctors: Industrial Action · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Liberal Democrats for their support. I really hope that resident doctors appreciate that this is a party with a spokesperson who supports the NHS and wants to see it improving, but, even from the vantage point of opposition, is clear that what the BMA is demanding is unaffordable. We know from experience that it is easier to make promises in opposition than to have to deliver them in government, so when an Opposition party is also saying that the demands are unaffordable, resident doctors should accept that. [ Interruption. ] Thank you for the noises off from the Conservative Front Bench. I reassure the Liberal Democrats that we are committed to ending corridor care by the end of the Parliament. I am really impressed by some of the progress that we have seen recently in some hospitals: Queen’s hospital in Romford has shown it can be done and other hospitals are showing real progress. We are determined to put the foot down on the accelerator. We will absolutely see capital investment to improve the NHS estate. We have 2,000 more GPs now than when we came into office—the highest number of GPs on record, in fact—although there is more to do. Let me give this commitment to the “Agenda for Change” workforce. So much of the oxygen and airtime has been consumed by doctors, but 1.5 million people work in the NHS, many of whom will never be paid as much as the lowest paid doctor. They have been overlooked for too long, and we are determined, through the negotiations and discussions that we are having with “Agenda for Change” unions, to put that right. That will be my focus for the future of the workforce.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Resident Doctors: Industrial Action · Hansard source

  More

  With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on the proposed industrial action by resident doctors. Yesterday evening, the British Medical Association called its latest round of strikes for 7 to 13 April, immediately following the long Easter bank holiday weekend. The announcement came just hours after its resident doctors committee rejected an historic deal that would have boosted pay, created jobs, improved career prospects and put money back in the pockets of its members. This was deeply disappointing after months of highly constructive and good-natured talks between the Government and the leadership of the RDC. In that context, the fact that the BMA’s immediate response was to call such extensive strike action, rather than return to the table, speaks volumes about what we are up against. I will set out how we have reached this regrettable position. Since the start of this year, the Government have been holding extensive and intensive discussions with the BMA resident doctors committee leadership, who engaged in good faith. I have spoken personally to or met with the chair several times, and those engagements were, of course, on top of the near-daily dialogue that his team held with officials from my Department. Together, we got further than many thought possible. As a result of our discussions, a landmark deal was put formally to the full resident doctors committee on 22 March. Based on our engagement with the BMA officers, we were optimistic that it would be received positively, although I was aware of the officers’ preference that it should be a deal over two years rather than three years, and that they had expected the independent recommendation of the Review Body on Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration—the DDRB—to come out slightly higher than it did. Regrettably, despite the deal having been designed with and supported by the BMA leadership, the committee itself rejected it yesterday. I will run through what the RDC has unilaterally rejected on behalf of the 81,337 resident doctors in this country. The headlines of the deal are: reform of the pay structure, so resident doctors would benefit from more frequent pay rises at each stage of their training; pay rises over three years baked in, linked to the independent DDRB recommendations, as requested by the BMA; and reimbursement of Royal College exam fees from April this year, which resident doctors currently pay out of pocket. They can be as much as £2,200 for psychiatry, £2,300 for paediatrics and £3,700 for ophthalmology. Other headlines are: contract reform for locally employed doctors to ensure they also benefit from greater job security, equal opportunities for pay progression, and improved terms and conditions; and up to 4,500 more specialty training places created over the next three years, including 1,000 for this year’s applicants. Alongside the deal, the Government have just passed the Medical Training (Prioritisation) Act 2026, so that domestically trained resident doctors no longer compete on equal terms with overseas graduates for specialist jobs. The Act will reduce the competition ratio for jobs from almost 4:1 to almost 2:1. The deal also follows the 28.9% pay rise already delivered by the Government. As a result of the proposed package, resident doctors would have seen an average pay rise of 4.9% this year; starting pay for new graduates entering the profession this year would have been nearly £12,000 higher than four years ago; the lowest-paid foundation year ones and foundation year twos would have seen a pay boost of at least 6.2% and 7.1%, respectively, this year; and there would have been 1,000 more resident doctor jobs in a matter of days from this April. Along with pay decisions that I have already taken, the package would have meant that, this year alone, resident doctors would have been, on average, 35.2% better off than four years ago. There are not many, if any, professions in our country for which that is true. The DDRB recommendation is 3.5%, which is significantly less than what is on offer as a result of pay structure reform. The BMA has pointed to the war in Iran as reason to reject the deal. I will spell out the consequences of what this country is facing. The Government want to see de-escalation and a swift resolution to the conflict, with a negotiated agreement that puts tough conditions on Iran, specifically in relation to its nuclear ambitions. However, we are planning on the basis of a prolonged conflict, because that is the prudent thing to do. In that eventuality, there would be an impact on the economy and on the public finances. Were that to happen, a future offer to resident doctors would not look better than what is on offer today. The Government’s tolerance for costly and disruptive action that undermines a critical public service is fast diminishing. In three years’ time, I do not want resident doctors to look back on this moment with regret as they turn down three years of guaranteed pay rises, more money in their pockets through reimbursement of exam fees, and more jobs. The BMA is choosing more strikes. As a direct result of its decision, and despite our best efforts, resident doctors will be worse off. Indeed, on the very day that 1,000 more specialty training places would have opened up for resident doctors with this deal, the BMA will be on strike, demanding more job opportunities. Let me turn to the impact on patients and the NHS. Yesterday, the British social attitudes survey revealed that patient satisfaction has increased for the first time since before the covid pandemic. Dissatisfaction has seen the sharpest decline since 1998. Patient satisfaction with access to GPs has gone from 60% when this Government came to office to more than 75% today. Wating lists are the lowest they have been for three years, four-hour performance in A&E is the best for four years, and ambulances are arriving faster than they have for half a decade. All of this has been achieved despite the BMA’s strikes, so I want to reassure patients that the NHS’s recovery will continue. In the most recent round of strikes, the NHS team pulled together and delivered 95% of planned elective activity. I am confident that we will see the same outstanding efforts if further action is taken. But to the BMA, I say: we can achieve so much more, and the improvements can be so much faster, if you take this deal and stop your strikes. Strikes have a significant financial cost. Every penny spent on keeping the show on the road during strikes is a penny that cannot be spent on improving staff pay and working conditions or better care for patients. The impact on the other staff working in the NHS, who are left to pick up the pieces, is severely felt. So I am asking the BMA’s resident doctors committee to reconsider. I will meet again with its officers. I also repeat my offer to meet with the entire committee, who have thus far refused to meet me since I became Secretary of State. Indeed, they are the only group of people I have offered to meet who have declined, which I find extraordinary in these circumstances. The deal on the table shows what we can achieve when we work together. In contrast to my predecessors, I have shown good intent from the outset. I have listened to the complaints that resident doctors have about their working lives—I agree with them, and I want to work with them to improve their working conditions as we improve the NHS. But when it comes to making a deal, the reality is that it takes two to tango. The BMA has until next Thursday to reconsider before we have to call time on the extra jobs, and the focus of the NHS and my Department turns to minimising the disruption from this unnecessary and unwarranted strike action, which would also consume the money set aside for this deal. But there will be a cost to the NHS, to staff and to patients. This was an historic opportunity, developed in tandem with the BMA leadership. I urge the committee to reconsider. I urge the BMA to call off its industrial action. I commend this statement to the House.