PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
NHS 10-Year Plan - 3 July 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I shall make a statement to the House on “Fit for the Future”, the Government’s 10-year health plan for England.

There are moments in our national story when our choices define who we are. In 1948, the Attlee Government made a choice founded on fairness: that everyone in our country deserves to receive the care they need, not just the care they can afford. It enshrined in law, and in the service itself, our collective conviction that healthcare is not a privilege to be bought and sold, but a right to be cherished and protected.

Now it falls to our generation to make the same choice: to rebuild our national health service, and to protect in this century what Attlee’s Government built for the last. That is the driving mission of our 10-year plan.

In September, Lord Darzi provided the diagnosis: the NHS was broken by 14 years of Conservative under-investment, and by their catastrophic top-down reorganisation. In the past year, Labour has put the NHS on the road to recovery. We promised 2 million extra appointments; we have delivered more than 4 million. We promised 1,000 new GPs on the frontline; we have recruited 1,900. We have taken almost a quarter of a million people off waiting lists, cutting them to their lowest level in two years. And we have launched an independent commission, chaired by Baroness Casey, to build a national consensus around a new national care service to meet the needs of older and disabled people into the 21st century.

Today, the Prime Minister has set out our prescription to get the NHS back on its feet and make it fit for the future. Our plan will deliver three big shifts. The first is from hospital to community. We will turn our national health service into a neighbourhood health service. The principle is simple: care should happen as locally as it can—digitally by default, in a patient’s home if possible, in a neighbourhood health centre when needed, and in a hospital where necessary.

We will put neighbourhood health centres in every community, so people can see a GP, nurse, physio, care worker, and therapist, and they can get a test, scan or treatment for minor injuries, all under one roof. The NHS will be organised around patients, rather than patients having to organise their lives around the NHS. It will be easier and faster to see a GP. We will train thousands more, end the 8 am scramble, provide same-day consultations, and bring back the family doctor. If you are someone with multiple conditions and complex needs, the NHS will co-create a personal care plan, so your care is done with you, not to you.

Pharmacies will play an expanded role in the neighbourhood health service. They will manage long-term conditions, treat conditions such as obesity and high blood pressure, screen for disease and vaccinate against it. We will also reform the dental contract, to get more dentists doing NHS work, rebuilding NHS dentistry.

Over the course of this plan, the majority of the 135 million out-patient appointments done each year will be moved out of hospitals. The funding will follow, so a greater share of NHS investment is spent in primary and community care.

The second shift is from analogue to digital. No longer will NHS staff have to enter seven passwords to login to their computers, or spend hours writing notes and entering data. Our plan will liberate frontline staff from the parts of the job that they hate, so they can focus on the job that they love—caring for patients. For the first time ever, patients will be given real control over a single, secure and authoritative account of their data. The single patient record will mean that NHS staff can see medical records and know a patient’s medical history, so they can provide them with the best possible care.

Wearable technology will feed in real-time health data, so patients’ health can be monitored while they stay in the comfort of their own home, with clinicians reaching out at the first signs of deterioration. The NHS app will become the front door to the health service, delivering power to the patient. You will be able to: book and rearrange appointments for you, your children or a loved one you care for; get instant advice from an AI doctor in your pocket; leave feedback on your care and see what feedback other patients have left; choose where you are treated; book appointments in urgent care so you do not wait for hours; and refer yourself to a specialist where clinically appropriate. Of course, patients can already do all that, but only if they can afford private healthcare. With Labour’s plan, every patient will receive a first-class service—whatever their background and whatever they earn.

The third shift is from sickness to prevention. Working with the food industry, we will make the healthy choice the easy choice to cut calories. We will roll out obesity jabs on the NHS. We will get Britain moving with our new NHS points scheme, and we will update school foods standards so that kids are fed healthy, nutritious meals. We will tackle the mental health crisis with support in every school to catch problems early, 24/7 support with virtual therapists for those with moderate need, and dedicated emergency departments for patients for when they reach crisis point.

The science is on our side. The revolution in artificial intelligence, machine learning and big data offers a golden opportunity to deliver better care at better value. New innovator passports and reform of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency will see medicines and technology rapidly adopted. Robotic surgery will become the norm in certain procedures, so patients recover from surgery at home rather than in hospital beds. The NHS will usher in a new age of medicine, leapfrogging disease so that we are predicting and preventing, rather than just diagnosing and treating. It is therefore the ambition of the plan to provide a genomic test for every newborn baby by 2035. Thanks to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor, this plan is backed by an extra £29 billion a year by the end of the spending review period, as well as the biggest capital investment in the history of the NHS.

Alongside investment comes reform. This plan slashes unnecessary bureaucracy and devolves power and resource to the frontline. It abolishes more than 200 bodies, because listening to patients, guaranteeing safety and protecting whistleblowers is core business for the NHS and should never have been outsourced. The plan commits to publishing league tables to rank providers. We will intervene to turn around failing providers, and we will reinvent the foundation trust model in a new system of earned autonomy. Pay will be tied to performance, so that excellence is recognised and failure has consequences. Tariffs will be reduced to boost productivity. Block contracts will end, with funding tied to outcomes. The plan gives power to the patient, so hospitals are financially rewarded for better service. It closes health inequalities by investing more in working-class communities, and it establishes a national investigation into maternity and neonatal services to deliver the truth, justice and improvement that bereaved families deserve.

I am sometimes told that NHS staff are resistant to change. On the contrary, they are crying out for it. They suffer the moral injury of seeing their patients treated in unfit conditions. They are ones driving innovation on the frontline, so their fingerprints are all over this plan. The public are desperate for change too. Each of us has our own story about the NHS and the difference it made to our lives. We also know the consequences of failure. To succeed, we need to defeat the cynicism that says that nothing ever changes.

We know that the change in our plan is possible because it is already happening. We have toured the length and breadth of the country and scouted the world for the best examples of reform. If Australia can effectively serve communities living in the outback, we can surely meet the needs of rural England. If community health teams can go door to door to prevent illness in Brazil, we can certainly do the same in Bradford. We know that we can build the neighbourhood health service, because teams in Cornwall, Camden, Northumbria, and Stratford—where I was with the Prime Minister and Chancellor this morning—are already showing us how to do it. We will take the best of the NHS to the rest of the NHS. We will apply to best examples of innovation from around the world to benefit people here at home. Above all else, we will give power to the patient. This plan fulfils Nye Bevan’s commitment in 1948 to put a megaphone to the mouth of every patient. It will restore the founding promise of the NHS to be there for us when we need it.

Of course, we know that there are those on the right who are willing us to fail. They will exploit the crisis in the NHS in order to dismantle it. The hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) and his cronies argue that universal healthcare could be afforded in the 20th century but not in the 21st. Labour rejects their declinist pessimism and so do the public. But that is the choice—it is change or bust, and we choose change.

We know that the British people are counting on us. It falls to us to ensure that the NHS not only survives but thrives, and we will not let our country down. Of course, if we succeed, we will be able to say with pride that will echo down the decades of the 21st century that we were the generation who built an NHS fit for the future and a fairer Britain where everyone lives well for longer. I commend this statement to the House.

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

I thank the Secretary of State for his typical courtesy in providing advance sight not only of his statement but of his plan. I am grateful, and others on the Government Front Bench might learn a thing or two from him. I am pleased to see the plan published. This Secretary of State is a rare thing these days: one whose announcements do tend to survive largely intact for more than a week. In the case of the plan, it is vital that it does stick.

The Secretary of State is not known to be short on ambition, and to be fair that is reflected in his plan; it is ambitious. I believe that his long-term goals are right and that the reforms he has set out build on the reforms that the Conservatives set out and carried out. The desire to shift care from hospital to community, to better use technology and to move to prevention is not new at all, but it remains vital.

The NHS undoubtedly needs reform, not just more cash—it is not fiscally sustainable in the long term to have 38% of day-to-day Government spending going on the NHS—so we need to focus on outcomes, not just inputs. But the plan, while welcome, is still sketchy on some of the details of delivery and how it will be paid for without the funds that the Secretary of State mentioned being eaten by pay rises and by inflation, as well as how that shift will be staffed. Greater use of the app is right, and builds on the amazing work done on the app by my right hon. Friend the Member for North East Cambridgeshire (Steve Barclay) when he was Secretary of State. Greater use of technology and of genomics is right, and the Secretary of State’s big five tech bets are largely right, but, as he knows, tech alone will not deliver this; people will, so a workforce plan that is clearly aligned with his strategy is vital.

Neighbourhood health centres are one of the measures at the heart of the Secretary of State’s plan. The concept is an interesting one, but it does throw up a number of questions that I hope he can answer in the spirit in which they are asked. Will the providers of those new centres be NHS public sector organisations, private sector organisations or a mixture? How will the centres fit with GP provision and other services without duplication or fishing in the same pool for staff? What assessment has he made of the cost of new buildings and technology to go in them? How many centres does he envisage, and by when? Crucially, how will he ensure that a public-private partnership model will avoid the downsides of the Blair- Brown private finance initiative model?

I ask those questions from a desire not to see this fail but to succeed, because it is in all our interests that the Secretary of State does succeed, but that will take time. Given that, on page 71 of his plan he talks about the need for “immediate opportunities” to be seized. Although there will be others, may I take the opportunity to suggest just one? He should deliver on the pre-election commitment for fracture liaison services to be delivered in all communities, as campaigned for by the Royal Osteoporosis Society, The Mail on Sunday, the Express and many others. That policy would deliver savings within the comprehensive spending review period. Similarly, Melton Mowbray in my constituency has a fantastic community hospital—there will be many up and down the country—and I hope that such hospitals will be a part of delivering more services in the community.

On maternity care, I welcome the Secretary of State’s commitment to a national investigation into maternity scandals, but I hope that will not stop him from delivering on the work done by the hon. Member for Canterbury (Rosie Duffield) and Theo Clarke, which included measures that can be implemented now to help improve maternity safety.

On systems reform, may I offer the Secretary of State a couple of words of caution? One is on folding the Health Services Safety Investigations Body into the Care Quality Commission, even as a discrete entity within it. HSSIB is not a regulator and is not designed as such, and it is important that those distinctions are not blurred in making that change. Similarly, may I urge him to be wary of further moving integrated care boards to larger geographies—they are at risk of becoming again the old regional health authorities—as that will move them further away from the local communities they serve and the entities providing social care in those communities with whom they must interact?

That brings me finally to a significant question hanging over the plan. Unless we move faster to adjust to the challenges of social care and put it on a sustainable footing, these reforms risk failing to seize the genuine opportunity presented. In the move from cross-party talks to an independent commission, we risk losing that opportunity. Crucially, I ask the Secretary of State again to consider bringing forward the end date of that commission so that we can go further and faster on social care.

I have often said to the Secretary of State that where he is wrong we will rightly hold him to account and challenge him, but where he is right we will offer constructive support. The plan, by and large, does say the right things. We must shift to outcomes and not focus continually on inputs, and we must do that through real and genuine reform. The challenges he faces will be in the detail, much of which is still to be confirmed, and crucially for the Government, in the actual delivery. He should not underestimate those challenges. I will work with him to improve the plan where it needs it, but I will support him where he pledges and brings genuine reform to our healthcare system. His plan will have a key test: will patients see the difference, and when will they see the difference? In all that we do, it is vital, as we reform our NHS, that patients are at the heart of our deliberations and our plans.

I thank the shadow Secretary of State for his constructive approach to what does need to be a successful plan for the next decade, to get our NHS back on its feet, to make it fit for the future and to make sure we improve the health of the nation. Aside from the lines that he was no doubt given to trot out at the beginning—he almost said them with conviction—we know that we can count on him to be rather more serious and sensible than the display we saw from the Opposition yesterday.

I turn to the shadow Secretary of State’s points. He was right to say that investment needs to go alongside reform. That is why the spending review only a matter of weeks ago set out the Chancellor’s commitment to the NHS and NHS reform. The Government are providing a £29 billion real-terms increase—a £53 billion cash increase—in annual NHS day-to-day spending by 2028-29. That funding will support the first steps towards delivering the reforms, the service improvements and the new technology set out in the plan.

But investment alone is not enough. One of the reasons we are paying more and more for worse and poorer outcomes is that we have the wrong care in the wrong place at the wrong time. Contrary to what we read in some newspaper columns—on the radio this morning I heard the hon. Member for Clacton once again attacking the NHS’s equitable principles and funding model—the problem is not the model of funding; it is the model of care. That is why the shift to neighbourhood health is essential for delivering better outcomes for patients and better value for taxpayers.

The technology coming down the track, and indeed the technology we already have, will drive the big productivity gains in the system that have eluded us. In recent years, the previous Government invested in more staff, but they put all those staff in hospitals to work in an undercapitalised NHS. If there are more inputs but not the enablers to deliver the service, we do not see the responding improvements in output and impact. That drives poorer productivity, poorer value for money and poor outcomes for patients, and that is the approach that we are changing.

If, for example, we roll out, as we will, ambient AI to all GPs, and we make sure that in their interactions with patients we liberate them from being glued to the screen, filling out the forms and drafting the letters, because that is all done automatically before the GP spends a few moments checking over to make sure it is right—if we can just save 90 seconds in every GP appointment—we will save the equivalent time of 2,000 more GPs. That is how we get more bang for the buck, that is how we drive productivity improvements and that is how we deliver better care and better value.

That is why the previous Government’s workforce plan was not right. It assumed that the NHS just needed growth at the same rates and in the same way as always. In fact, so implausible were the assumptions in that plan that if we had continued with the rate of growth that they had set out, by the end of the century 100% of our entire country would be working in the NHS. I know we love the NHS and we love the people who work in it, but I do not think that everyone in our country can or should be working in the national health service. To reassure the right hon. Gentleman, we will, this autumn, set out a new workforce plan that aligns with this 10-year plan.

The shadow Secretary of State asked about neighbourhood health centres. We aim to go for 250 to 300 new neighbourhood health centres by the end of this plan and 40 to 50 over the course of this Parliament. They will be NHS providers and we will have a combination of new builds and the refurbishment and rejuvenation of underutilised existing estate, both in the NHS and in the public sector. Therefore, the cost of each neighbourhood health centre will vary, from the low millions to around £20 million, depending on whether it is an upgrade, a refurb and expansion or a new build.

Given the undercapitalisation of the NHS that we inherited, even the record investment from public sources that the Chancellor has provided will not be enough to deal with the capital backlog. That is why, as set out in the Government’s infrastructure plan, with care and caution, and keeping in mind the mistakes that were made by the private finance initiative, we are looking at alternative private sources of investment to make sure that we can go further and faster on capital improvement, particularly in the neighbourhood health service.

The right hon. Gentleman asked me to commit again to fracture liaison services. Those services have a demonstrable impact on keeping people well and providing both better outcomes for patients and better value for taxpayers. That is why we want to see them rolled out across the country.

On maternity, I welcome his support for the investigation. NHS England is in the third year of the three-year plan put in place by the previous Government and we have sought to support that progress and not to interfere. Yet as we have seen, even with the most recent CQC report into the trust in Nottingham, we have so much more to do and an entire change in approach and culture is needed, let alone a change in practice and behaviour. I am committed to working with all parliamentary party groups across this House and to making sure that the expertise and insight that we have right across these Benches, on both sides of the Chamber, help us to drive maternity improvements.

He asked about us rolling HSSIB into the CQC. Let me provide him with this reassurance. HSSIB has been a really effective body, but we cannot justify the duplication of back-office functions and the inefficiency that comes with that. However, the CQC, when we came into office, was in such a dire state that we had to replace the leadership and we have in place an improvement plan. The House therefore has my assurance that we will not roll HSSIB into the Care Quality Commission until we are assured that the CQC is back to the standards that we expect for it to perform its core duties today, let alone the work it will do with HSSIB housed within the CQC.

On ICBs, I will not measure success through the number of bodies in the NHS; I think that has led us to where we are. However, I am committed to making sure that as we devolve more power, more responsibility and more resource closer to the frontline, to system leaders and to provider leaders, we also make sure that we have in place democratic accountability, so that Members of Parliament, local councils and metro mayors can influence and shape healthcare where they live.

The right hon. Gentleman also asked about social care. We are not waiting for Casey. The spending review gave an additional £4 billion to social care. We are delivering the biggest expansion of carer’s allowance since the 1970s and a significant increase in the disabled facilities grant. The Deputy Prime Minister and I will also shortly set out how we will deliver the first every fair pay agreements for the care workforce, building real social care progression.

On neighbourhood health, social care has to be part of it. In the context of this plan, social care features because it has a role to play on admission avoidance and speeding up delayed discharges. However, we know that social care is important in its own right and that is why it is important that it has its own commission.

Finally, the shadow Secretary of State asked about whether people will see and feel these improvements. We know on the Government Benches that we will be judged by results and by whether people can feel the change that we are delivering. All I would say to people watching our proceedings today is this: in our first year, we promised 2 million more appointments to cut waiting lists—we doubled that; we promised to deliver 1,000 more GPs—we have almost doubled that; and we promised that people would see the NHS moving in the right direction—waiting lists are at the lowest point for two years. We know that there is more to do, but I hope that the progress people have seen under this Labour Government reassures them that, when it comes to our national health service, if anything, we under-promise and over-deliver. We know that people will see and feel the change. I say respectfully, given the shadow Secretary of State’s constructive tone, that that will be the difference between a Labour Government and a Conservative one.

I call the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee.

As the acting Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee, I am delighted that the 10-year plan was finally launched today. I thank the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care for presenting it to the House.

The plan represents a major opportunity for constructive reform of the health and social care system, and I am delighted that the Secretary of State will come to the Committee on 14 July to be scrutinised on it. Many organisations have waited patiently for the 10-year plan to be published. Will the Secretary of State explain how the plan will help restore the promise of a first-class service in the NHS?

I thank my hon. Friend for her question and for the leadership she is showing to the Select Committee while the substantive Chair, the hon. Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran), is off on mat leave. What a delight it was to see the Committee Chair on the Terrace this week with her new baby. That was really delightful and we wish her well.

One of the exciting things for me about today’s launch is just how widespread the support has been from across a range of different organisations that we will need to work with to deliver the plan. Whether it is the royal colleges and the trade unions, the organisations that represent patients, the wide range of healthcare charities or, crucially, frontline staff, everyone is up for this change and everyone is desperate for it to succeed.

We will not get everything right and we will make mistakes along the way. We will listen and always learn and reflect. We know in the Government that we cannot do this without effective leadership from Ministers, but nor can Government do this alone. It is now our responsibility to mobilise the more than 1.5 million people who work in the NHS, the more than 1.5 million people who work in social care and our whole country behind a national mission to get our NHS back on its feet, to make sure it is fit for the future and to make sure, fundamentally, that we attack the injustices that lead to ill health, so that we have a fairer Britain where everyone lives well for longer.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

I thank the Secretary of State for early sight of the plan this morning. After years of Conservative failure, a plan for the future of the NHS is welcome and Liberal Democrats support the Secretary of State in his vision to shift the NHS to a community-focused, preventive service. However, I seek his reassurance on some questions.

In the 143 pages of the 10-year plan, there is only a passing reference to social care. Everyone knows that we cannot fix the NHS without fixing social care. With so many people unable to return home from hospital to get the care they need, solving the crisis in social care is a huge part of moving care out of hospital and into the community. Will the Secretary of State bring forward the Casey review, so that it reports in full this year, and reinstate the cross-party talks, so that consensus can be reached on the future of care?

I welcome the idea of a neighbourhood health centre, but how does that interact with the plan for GPs? The 10-year plan implies that GP contracts will encourage them to cover a huge geographic area of 50,000 people. In North Shropshire, that would be two or three market towns combined and would span dozens of miles. Can the Secretary of State reassure me that there will still be a physical health centre, accessible to all, and that in areas with little public transport in particular, people will be able to access care when they need it?

Finally, the plan hinges on the shift to digital solutions, and that is not without risk. The use of the NHS app is critical to what happens. How will the Secretary of State ensure that those without a smartphone—because they cannot afford one, do not feel confident using one or simply do not have adequate broadband or internet—can access the NHS? Many elderly and disabled people in particular who are digitally excluded will feel worried by today’s announcement.

I welcome the Liberal Democrat support for the plan, and the constructive way in which Liberal Democrats have sought to work with us since the general election in pursuit of better health and social care services. I understand the point the hon. Member makes on social care. I will not repeat at length the points I made to the shadow Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for Melton and Syston (Edward Argar), but I hope the House is reassured by the action we are already taking on social care, whether through greater funding, the expansion of the carer’s allowance, increasing the disabled facilities grant, the fair pay agreements, and ensuring a partnership with social care to deliver better neighbourhood health services.

Given what we have said about the importance of data, digital connections and better systems, I should say that in some parts of the country, the social care system is ahead of the NHS; it makes better use of data, and joins up systems in a more effective and efficient way. The NHS can learn lots from social care, as well as the other way round. I will take on board the representations of the Liberal Democrat and Conservative Front Benchers on speeding up the Casey commission—that is duly noted.

I absolutely reassure the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan) on the point that she raises about neighbourhood health centres. One of the reasons we want to devolve so much power in the NHS is that I genuinely think that the closer decisions are made to the communities they serve, the better the outcomes and the provision. A one-size-fits-all approach to neighbourhood care simply will not work. My constituency is on the London-Essex border, and there are three hospitals within a 15-to-20 minute drive of where I live. In many rural towns, coastal communities and villages across the country, there is not even one hospital within that distance. In fact, people are driving huge distances across the country to get to a hospital. On our priority of rolling out neighbourhood health centres, I want to reassure Members on both sides of the House that we will start with the areas of greatest inequality and need, and communities where people have to travel far to their nearest hospital, so that people can genuinely receive care closer to home and, indeed, at home. Technology can play a big role in that.

I understand the cynicism about digital roll-out. Government IT projects do not have a great reputation historically; let us be clear about that. We are learning from past mistakes and ensuring that we have the right experts in the room to help us. So much of that is about the digital clinical leadership helping to marry the best scientific and technological minds in our country to the best clinical and scientific experience to ensure that we get this absolutely right. We cannot afford to fail or be left behind. The tragedy in the country today is that there are so many brilliant innovators in life sciences and med tech who are designing and making things here in Britain, but when it comes to scaling up, they are shipping out, because the NHS has been a poor partner and a poor customer. We will change that; we will create more in Britain, and ensure that it is rolled out right across the country. Staff will be liberated from the drudgery and toil of unnecessary bureaucracy and admin that can be automated, and patients will have more ease, convenience, choice and control at their fingertips. This revolution is happening, and it is crucial that no one is left behind.

I take seriously the point the hon. Member made about the digitally disconnected, and there are two responses to that. First, people like me who book via the touch of a button free up telephone lines, get out of the way of reception desks, and free up more capacity for face-to-face and telephone appointments. I believe strongly in horses for courses, and in patient choice. Those patients who want to pick up the phone or who want to be seen face to face must be given that choice and control, and we will give it to them.

Secondly, working with the Science, Innovation and Technology Secretary, we will deal with the fundamental problem of digital disconnection in our country. I knocked on the door of one of my party members when I was canvassing down her street because I had heard she was ill. She opened the door, and I asked if she was okay and if she needed anything from the shops. She looked me up and down as if I had just said the most ridiculous thing and said, “Oh no, dear. Thank you very much, but I do my shopping online with my iPad.” We should not assume that because people are older, they are naturally digitally disconnected. They are some of the most tech-savvy people, and we have to ensure that those skills are enjoyed by all, in keeping with the NHS’s principle of ensuring that healthcare is available universally to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay.

Order. Some 60 Members wish to participate. Clearly, the statement will likely impact every constituency in the country, so I understand why so many hon. Members wish to question the Secretary of State. It is our intention to try to call everybody, but there is important business later that has to be reached. May I urge brevity on all Members, and short answers on the Secretary of State? Health Committee member Jen Craft will now set an example.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. The heart, soul and lifeblood of our NHS are the people who work in it. I doubt there is anyone in this House who does not owe a personal debt of gratitude to a health care worker. Can the Secretary of State reassure me that the fingerprints of NHS workers are all over this 10-year plan, and that it has been designed and produced with all their valuable inputs?

I certainly can give my hon. Friend that reassurance. We launched the biggest consultation since the NHS began. We had over 270,000 contributions, 250,000 thousand responses and almost 2 million visits to the change.nhs.uk website, so I can absolutely give people the assurance that staff and patients’ fingerprints are all over the plan. That is why we have such a rich plan, in which people can have confidence.

There is much to welcome in today’s plan, particularly the proposal to bring back family doctors, which I tried to do but frankly did not succeed in doing when I was Secretary of State, so we all wish him well with that, but does he agree that as we seek to transform out-of-hospital care, it is vital that we do not take our eye off the ball and allow another Mid Staffs inside hospitals? Does he also agree that it is essential that the CQC gives overall ratings and calls a spade a spade when it comes to the quality of care in hospitals, so that we know whether the care delivered by hospitals in our constituencies is outstanding or good, and if not—if it requires improvement or is inadequate—that action can be taken, and lives can be saved?

I strongly agree with my predecessor on that. It is important that the CQC’s reports and judgments can be understood by the public and the people responsible for carrying out the improvements that it recommends. Via the NHS app, we will have much more transparency for patients about the range of providers, the quality of services and the views of other patients. That will give patients the freedom to choose, in a more data-driven way, where and when they are treated. There is also the importance of data-driven face-to-face inspections by experts. We can also have early warning systems that would alert people who hold his office and mine that something is going seriously wrong, so that we can intervene before more lives are lost unnecessarily.

I call Select Committee member Josh Fenton-Glynn.

The shifts announced today, from analogue to digital, and from hospital to community, are exactly the shifts that will make the NHS stable for the future. Will the Secretary of State elaborate on the “analogue to digital” point? A practice manager in Calder Valley recently said to me, “It’s all very well looking at artificial intelligence, but it takes us half an hour to turn on a computer.” What more will he do to ensure that we improve the NHS digital offer for everyone working in the health service?

I thank my hon. Friend for that question. On whether people feel cautious optimism or quiet scepticism based on the experience that he describes, I have heard the same thing so many times. “I love AI, genomics and machine learning—yep, great. But can you just give me the basic technology that works?” Well, I can confirm that in 2026-27 we will make sure that we create a single log-on for staff. I am not holding my breath for that to be the front-page splash tomorrow, but that one thing, as well as saving loads of staff time, will give them confidence that genuine change is coming.

As always, the Secretary of State makes a good fist of an impossible job, but I think we all know in our heart of hearts that this model, which takes 38% of public funding, is unsustainable in the long term. He mentions the Australian outback; I have been a voice in the wilderness, urging him to replicate the excellent Australian system, which is a mix of public and private. I will not do that again now, but may I ask him to at least look at Australia’s pharmaceutical benefits scheme, which ensures national procurement of medicines, so that people who have a medical card there get their medicines cheaper than people here?

I am always willing to search the world for ways to spend taxpayers’ money more effectively, and the right hon. Gentleman makes some good arguments on making sure that we get a good deal on medicines pricing, and on using the real procurement power of the single payer model—but therein lies the answer to the other part of his challenge. It is the single payer model, created in 1948, that makes the NHS ideally placed to get much better value in procurement, and to harness and lead the revolution in AI, machine learning, genomics and big data, in a way that many insurance-based systems struggle with. I assure him that if there were a better way of funding the NHS, I would have the political courage to make the argument, but we looked at other systems of funding and concluded that that is really not the problem. It is not the model of funding; it is the model of care, and that is what we are going to sort out.

When I knock on doors in my Gloucester constituency, I hear time and again about the importance of tackling the 8 am scramble for a GP appointment, and the difficulty many of my constituents faced under the Conservative Government getting the care they needed. Will my right hon. Friend explain how Labour’s 10-year plan for health will deliver on the Government’s mission to get treatment out of hospitals and into the community, so that every one of my constituents can get the care they need in the community in which they live?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question; he is such a strong voice for the people of Gloucester. We are already delivering improvements in general practice, with 1,900 more GPs employed on the frontline, £900 million more for general practice, and the first contract agreed with GPs for quite some years. We are working in genuine partnership with GPs, who will be at the centre of the neighbourhood health service and of neighbourhood health centres. I am determined to ensure that we do things with our friends in general practice, not to them. Where things are working, I have no interest in going in like a bull in a china shop and imposing top-down change unnecessarily; we learned that lesson from Lord Lansley. I am confident that we have a plan that GPs will relish and embrace, and that they will feel reassured that the future of general practice is bright. After years of campaigning for a Government to rebuild general practice, they finally have a Government who are on their side.

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement on his plan. I note the comments on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, but the Scottish Medicines Consortium is the envy of the other three nations. I would like to offer him an early win. There is a drug, Enhertu, for the treatment of women with secondary breast cancer; it prolongs life. It is available in Scotland and in 20 other nations. Will he review the situation in England under this plan?

We work closely with NICE to make sure that we consider, in an evidence-based way, the case for prescribing new medicines. We want patients to have access to the latest treatments and technology, and we work with the pharmaceutical industry to get as many medicines as possible to patients. We definitely need growth in this area.

I have a counter-offer for the hon. Gentleman. I notice that the Scottish Government are now on their fifth health plan; none of the others has worked. We are always willing to help, and I will put a copy of the plan in the post to my Scottish counterpart, but I will not hold out much hope. In England and Wales, where a Labour Government are in place, waiting lists are falling; in Scotland, waiting lists are rising, and we have heard astonishing admissions of failure from Ministers whose party has been in power for almost 20 years. It is very clear: Scotland needs an alternative. Scotland’s NHS needs an alternative: Scottish Labour.

I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement. Yesterday was one year to the day since I completed my radiotherapy treatment for prostate cancer. I was very lucky—my cancer was caught at stage 3 and was treatable—but I had to ask my GP for the prostate-specific antigen test that got me my treatment. I know my right hon. Friend has that said he wants to see a national screening programme aimed particularly at black men over 45, one in four of whom will get prostate cancer, people like me who have a family history of prostate cancer, and men over the age of 50. Will he ensure that we have a national screening programme as part of the 10-year plan?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right about the importance of screening, and it is brilliant to see him fighting fit. That is exactly the sort of outcome that we want from effective diagnosis and treatment. He is also right to highlight the racial inequalities in this area. It cannot be right in this decade of the 21st century that black men are twice as likely as white men to die of prostate cancer. The national cancer plan will come out later this year, and the screening committee is looking at the case he makes. He will find at the centre of the 10-year plan a commitment not just to diagnose earlier and treat faster, but to tackle the gross health inequalities that blight our society in a way that is simply not tolerable in the 21st century.

Does the NHS 10-year plan include an assisted dying scheme? If the present private Member’s Bill runs out of time at the end of this parliamentary Session, and thus falls, will the Secretary of State reintroduce the legislation as a Government Bill in the next parliamentary Session?

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for that question—[Laughter.] Given that the Bill is still passing through Parliament, assisted dying is not referred to in this 10-year-plan, but I assure both this House and the other place that regardless of different views among Ministers and across the House, we will abide by the law of the land. We will abide by the will of this House and the other place. If the Bill times out in the other place, I have no doubt that someone else will bring it back. I suspect it will not be a Government Bill.

It is important that we have the debate and that we scrutinise the legislation well. I am proud of the way the House has conducted the debate. My hon. Friend the Minister for Care, who is not in his place now, along with the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice, my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Finchley and Golders Green (Sarah Sackman), have done an exemplary job in supporting people on both sides of the debate to give the Bill the detailed scrutiny that it had here and that it will no doubt have in the other place. That is a credit to this House.

Let me say to the Secretary of State: well done. This is a really ambitious and excellent programme.

On the subject of cancer care, in the past few years we have both had good experiences of the NHS at its best, but it is important to improve services by getting the NHS to work with universities and the voluntary sector in local cancer alliances. Will he look at what I think is an unintended consequence of that? If a local cancer alliance is funded by an NHS trust, its funding continues; if it is funded by an ICB, as the South Yorkshire cancer alliance is, its funding will be cut in line with the rest of the ICB’s budget. That is not fair. Whether an alliance suffers cuts depends on which organisation funds it. Will he see if he can rectify that?

I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s support. Given his expertise, it means a lot. I am especially grateful to the GPs in his constituency with whom he and I spent time; that experience really had an impact on my thinking about neighbourhood health.

On cancer, I am happy to look at the issue he raises with the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton). We want to get this right. Cancer alliances have played a valuable role, and we want to see that approach to joined-up working between research, diagnostics and treatment go from strength to strength, so I will happily pick that up.

In the constructive spirit that has characterised much of this discussion, I welcome much of what the Secretary of State has announced today: bringing care closer to people in their homes, investing more in prevention—it is all good stuff. But there seems to be a missed opportunity here. In the 143 pages of this document, there is virtually no mention of social care. Lord Darzi told us last year that we cannot fix the NHS without fixing social care. Six months ago today, the Secretary of State promised cross-party talks and urgent work on the Casey commission, but the commission is delayed and the cross-party talks have never materialised. Will the Secretary of State please treat the care crisis with the urgency it deserves and bring forward that work, so that we can build the necessary cross-party consensus to fix the care crisis?

First, I thank the hon. Member for the Green party’s support for so much of the 10-year plan. She is right to highlight the importance of social care to resolving the NHS crisis. Let me reassure her that we are acting urgently as we await the first report of the Casey commission. The Chancellor did that with the Budget and the spending review, providing £4 billion more of investment. We have done that with the biggest increase in carer’s allowance since the 1970s, and with the disabled facilities grant, which does not just mean more ramps and home adaptations but more freedom, more dignity and more independence for disabled people. The Deputy Prime Minister and I will shortly set out how we will deliver fair pay agreements, and social care will absolutely be part of the neighbourhood health team. I hope that that reassures the hon. Member.

Let me also reassure parties across the House that we will wait for the Casey commission to launch. I would like to be able to proceed with the actions we will be taking in this Parliament and, crucially, with the long-term plan for social care in a cross-party way, to build that genuine national consensus—I would be delighted to achieve that.

I call the Chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee.

I thank the Secretary of State for this really ambitious and bold plan to make sure our NHS is fit for the future. He will be aware that Professor Ian Abbs, the chief executive of St Thomas’ hospital in my constituency, will step down later this year. I want to thank him for his dedication and compassion in leading St Thomas’, especially during the covid crisis, when the hospital cared for so many patients, including the then Prime Minister in his crucial hour.

The Secretary of State may be aware that Royal College of Nursing analysis shows that by 2029, 11,000 nurses may have left the profession after working less than 10 years in the service. Nurses cite exhaustion, mental health and stress as their reasons for leaving the profession. Can he give us an update on how we will ensure we have a workforce that is fit, so that we can achieve our ambitious 10-year plan for the NHS?

I am so grateful to my hon. Friend for her question. I pay tribute to Professor Ian Abbs. He is an outstanding NHS leader, and we have loved working with him. As with many people of his calibre moving on from their positions of leadership in the NHS, it is a bit like the Hotel California—you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave. We will not let him drift off into a quiet retirement; we are determined to make use of his expertise.

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise the importance of nursing. Nurses and midwives will play an increasingly important role in neighbourhood health. They are central to our shift to a modern, digital NHS. They are clinical leaders in their own right. Following the 10-year health plan, the chief nursing officer for England will work with the professions to develop a strategy that will make nursing and midwifery modern careers of choice, to address the decline in applications. As I have set out this week, we are looking forward to working closely with the Royal College of Nursing and Unison—of which, I should say, I am a member—to make sure that the status, the conditions and the impact of nursing on our NHS go from strength to strength, because nurses are the backbone of the NHS. We would not have a national health service without them.

I join others in welcoming much of the Secretary of State’s plan, but I want to return to the question of the Health Services Safety Investigations Body, to which my right hon. Friend the Member for Melton and Syston (Edward Argar) referred. I welcome the tone of the Secretary of State’s response to that part of my right hon. Friend’s questions, but will he agree to meet those of us from the Select Committee—a cross-party group of people—who campaigned over many years to bring this body, which is still in its infancy, into existence before making any further decisions on it?

As my right hon. Friend says, HSSIB is not a regulator, and to put it in with a regulator will create confusion about what it is. If he were Secretary of State for Transport, he would never dream of putting the air accidents investigation branch into the Civil Aviation Authority, because they have completely different and separate functions. That needs to be understood across the health service, and it is obviously not well understood at the moment.

I welcome the hon. Member’s constructive approach. Of course, we are happy to receive representations on HSSIB. I would just like to outline the problem we are trying to solve, which is that the patient safety landscape is increasingly cluttered. We have far too many bodies trying to do the same thing, cutting across each other, and for frontline staff and leaders on the receiving end of those many and often competing instructions, it can actually make things less safe rather than more safe. I really value the expertise in the Health Services Safety Investigations Body. We do not want to see that expertise lost, nor do we want to move it into the CQC prematurely, before the CQC is ready to receive it. I hope that that reassures him, but we are happy to have that conversation.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend, his Ministers and officials on putting together a vision for the NHS for the next 10 years. It will optimise how we live, but it is also really important that we can palliate how we die. Could he set out how he will ensure that we do not have a postcode lottery for specialist palliative care services, so that we can palliate well for everybody across our country? Will he meet with the leaders of the independent commission on palliative and end-of-life care to ensure that we get this right really quickly and for the future?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her question. We want a society where everyone receives high-quality, compassionate care from diagnosis through to end of life. Palliative and end-of-life care services will have a big role to play in our shift out of hospitals and into the community, the emphasis on personalisation for patients and their families, and the joining up between primary and community care services. I would be delighted to hear more from the commission. It is really important that we get this right. Regardless of where people stood on the debate about assisted dying, the one thing that united everyone across the House was a belief that palliative care needs to be so much better than it is today, and that is what we will work on together.

There is much that unites us in this House about the excellence in this 10-year plan—in particular the fact that the NHS needs reform and that, of course, healthcare should always be free at the point of delivery. But brilliant frontline staff, doctors and nurses say to me that the issue is the bureaucracy and the unnecessary processes and procedures, including in social care. Can the Secretary of State reassure the House that the senior management of the NHS are absolutely determined to reduce the bureaucracy, in particular around technology and the delays caused by GDPR?

The NHS leadership are absolutely determined to work with us to reduce waste, inefficiency and bureaucracy. We have in Sir Jim Mackey an outstanding chief executive of the NHS, and he and his team are working closely with Ministers to make sure we achieve that goal.

As for the funding model, I just do not know where the Reform party stands from one day of the week to the next. I heard the leader of the hon. Member’s party on the radio this morning doing the dance of the seven veils. He is normally very good at being a straight-talking politician—that is how he likes to present himself—but I cannot follow what the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) thinks about this issue. Does he support a taxpayer-funded universal NHS free at the point of use? [Hon. Members: “No!”] I do not think he does. Does he support the European-style insurance system? I think he probably does—it is the only European thing he has ever supported, by the way. We are in no doubt: the NHS needs reform, but it needs the Reform party like a hole in the head.

I commend not only my right hon. Friend and his team on today’s 10-year plan but also the leadership and Budget of our right hon. Friend the Chancellor, who made today and the next 10 years of our NHS possible. For too long, the NHS has been stuck in crisis mode. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will remember taking an important call while in my constituency, and he will know that life expectancy in Bury North can vary by seven years in wards just one mile apart. In East ward, Redvales and Moorside, where he took that call, child poverty rates now reach 42%. Can I ask him to ensure that those wards get a healthy share of the new funding for working-class communities, so that we can start to close the health gaps and give every child the chance of a long, healthy life?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right; it was on a snowy day of campaigning for him in Bury North that I received the phone call that would change my life, giving me my kidney cancer diagnosis. Despite that fact, I have since been back to Bury North; I am not saying that it was his bad luck—

It was not causation.

It was coincidence rather than causation, as my hon. Friend the cancer Minister says—although, given both our experiences, we will rethink our visit schedule to Bury.

On a serious note, my hon. Friend the Member for Bury North (Mr Frith) is absolutely right to make the link between poverty, particularly child poverty, and ill health. The last Labour Government lifted 400,000 children out of poverty; I am so proud to think that when in the first year of this Labour Government we chose to extend free school meals to half a million children from low-income families, with that one measure on one day we lifted 100,000 children out of poverty. That is the difference Labour Governments make, and that is how we will deliver not just an NHS fit for the future, but a fairer, more equal, more just society.

I look forward to studying the detail of this plan, but I welcome the Secretary of State’s commitment to neighbourhood health centres and likewise his commitment in a previous answer to rural communities. May I therefore offer him a golden opportunity? He will have heard me over many years in this House call for funding to build a new health centre in the village of Long Crendon, which lost its GP practice during the pandemic. They have the land, they have the planning permission and it will cost less than his lower number of £200 million to build. Will he convert words to delivery and commit to Long Crendon?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his support with the plan, which I am sure is in no way connected to the fact that he wants some money out of us for that neighbourhood health centre. I will take his question as the first bid we have had from those on the Opposition Benches, and I look forward to receiving those representations from him.

The Secretary of State will know how important improving mental health support is to me. I hope that what the 10-year plan says about access to mental health provision will help to address the long waiting times for mental health services that the Government inherited. I particularly welcome what he said about using the NHS app for patients to self-refer for various treatments. I hope that that will cover talking therapies as well. Does he share my belief that opening up access to talking therapies in that way will enable more people to get that effective treatment at the right time, so that they can better manage their condition?

I thank my hon. Friend for his service to our country and our NHS. We are so lucky to have his expertise in the House. I am really proud that this Government will deliver mental health support in every primary and secondary school in the country and neighbourhood mental health services in every community. We will also ensure that people who are in mental health crisis do not end up in busy, noisy, overwhelming A&E departments, but will instead go to new mental health emergency departments, which we aim to roll out across 50% of type 1 A&E departments—either co-located or, if not, certainly nearby. I look forward to working with him on that.

My hon. Friend is quite right to emphasise the importance of talking therapies. That is how we not only help people to achieve their best when they are young and in education, but ensure that people are supported to stay in the world of work or to find work. We know there is a demonstrable link between mental health and wellbeing, good work and good outcomes. That is very relevant this week.

I welcome the Secretary of State’s 10-year plan. In October, in response to my Westminster Hall debate on the national cancer plan, the Government committed to publishing one later this year. I am confident that that will happen in the autumn, and the wider cancer community is equally enthusiastic. However, the 10-year plan announced today makes only a brief mention of the national cancer plan. Can the Secretary of State confirm that improved diagnosis, improved screening for at-risk groups, improved treatment outcomes, concentration on rare cancers and cancers in young people, better and continued workforce planning, more support and funding for research, better relationships with drug companies and much more will be part of the national cancer plan?

I thought for a moment there that the hon. Gentleman, having called for the plan, was going to write it. I can reassure him that he has covered all the right areas; I am delighted that he is as enthusiastic as we and the whole cancer community are about the plan. We deliberately did not go into specific conditions in the 10-year plan for health, because otherwise it would have turned into a Christmas tree, with every condition group trying to attach its bauble to it, but it is really important that this 10-year plan creates the rising tide that lifts all ships—including, as he notes, not just common conditions, but the rare ones too.

I congratulate the Secretary of State on bringing forward a bold and ambitious plan for our national health service. We know that by 2050 there will be up to 4 million people living with sight loss, so we also need eye healthcare that is fit for the future. Can my right hon. Friend tell me that his plan will end the postcode lottery, join up primary and secondary care, tackle the challenges with the workforce and provide a proper high-quality sight loss eye care pathway and investment in research and innovation, so that we can end avoidable sight loss once and for all?

I congratulate my hon. Friend on her consistent campaigning on this issue, which has done so much to keep it on the national agenda. We will support more eye care services being delivered in the community, helping to create capacity within secondary eye care services too. Patients can be assured that optometrists have the training to manage a wide range of eye conditions safely in the community. We will also support improved IT connectivity between primary and secondary care, which has been shown to improve the referral and triage of patients, and enable the better use of technology to support local services.

Of course, there are still challenges: ophthalmology is one of the largest out-patient specialties, representing 8% of the total NHS waiting list, and the Royal College of Ophthalmologists workforce census found that 76% of units do not have enough consultants to meet demand. We will address those issues; we are working across both the public and the independent sectors to ensure that people receive the care they need, when they need it. A lot has been done but, as my hon. Friend says, there is so much more to do.

I welcome this plan. As the Secretary of State is aware, my constituents Charlotte and James Bassett have been fighting for answers since the death of their baby daughter Norah in 2019. What assurances can he give my constituents that any recommendations by the national maternity and neonatal taskforce will be implemented quickly?

I thank the hon. Member for the outstanding way she has represented her constituents since she arrived in this House—not only on this issue, but on many others. I reassure her that we will work with families in a spirit of co-production to ensure that we identify what has gone wrong, so that families receive truth and accountability for failures and the reassurance of knowing that improvements will be made so that other families do not have to suffer in the way that they have. Things have gone so badly wrong, but I am confident that, with the approach we are setting out, we will be able to make rapid improvements, and I will keep the House regularly informed.

I thank the Secretary of State for this wonderful statement, delivering on a commitment that we made together at the Richardson community hospital in Barnard Castle two years ago to move services back into the community. I want to ask him about the use of bank staff in the NHS: not only is it a massive waste of money, but it has created a situation where only one in five of this year’s midwifery graduates feels confident of getting a job. On behalf of Mrs Rushworth, who is one of those, her friends, and nurses and midwives in the north-east who have contacted me about this issue, what will the Secretary of State do to ensure that those who have given 2,300 hours of unpaid labour to the NHS and are graduating with tens of thousands of pounds of debt can get a job?

I remember that visit to Barnard Castle—unlike visits by some people from Westminster, I was not there to get my eyes tested and my visit was perfectly within the rules. My hon. Friend is right to emphasise the importance of neighbourhood health, which is in the plan, and of reducing the cost of agency spend in the NHS. I want staff to feel that they are part a team and for there to be more flexible working, so that people do not feel that they have to resort to agency work to receive flexibility. I am proud that within our first year we have saved a billion pounds in agency expenditure, getting better outcomes for patients and better value for taxpayers.

The Secretary of State will be aware that the Carr-Hill formula has not been updated since its introduction in 2004: the staff market forces factor is based on earnings data from 1999 and the population density data that is used is the rurality adjustment from 2001, but the population of Huntingdonshire has increased by 30,000 since that time. I know that the Department has not conducted an impact assessment on the benefit of updating the formula, but the Secretary of State has announced that he will do so and that there will be sharp focus on money following need. Given that Huntingdon is a quickly growing region, where thousands more homes are set to be built in the next 10 years, will he clarify for my constituents that the formula will be updated and that GP surgeries in Huntingdon will receive a fairer allocation of the global sum funding?

I can give the hon. Gentleman the assurance that we are reforming the Carr-Hill formula and ensuring that funding is based on need. I am delighted to be working closely with the British Medical Association’s general practitioners committee on the reforms that we are making in this and other areas of general practice.

I welcome this brilliant plan. I particularly love the double helix that is featured on the front cover, because genetic discoveries have the greatest promise of all. If we all knew a little bit more about our health, we might all look after it a little bit better. Does the Secretary of State agree that the single patient record, with easy patient access, will be transformative?

Given my hon. Friend’s expertise, I am delighted that he has welcomed the plan so enthusiastically. I wholeheartedly agree with what he said. I give him 10 out of 10 for his product placement of the 10-year plan and, in particular, his remarks on the design of the front cover, which I will pass on to the team.

Having secured a Westminster Hall debate on the issue, I am delighted to hear the Secretary of State reconfirm that the Carr-Hill formula will be revised and changed. I am also delighted with the ambition of the new plan, and I think it is very good in an awful lot of ways. Will the Secretary of State remember that GP surgeries are businesses? To correctly plan, they need confirmation and positive indications of where their funding will go over a multi-year period. If that is always in the front of his head, then all will go well. I have scanned the plan and read about the new choice charter, the Care Quality Commission and the National Quality Board. However, I am concerned that the ICBs are becoming more powerful and unaccountable to local neighbourhoods. The regulators are good and will keep them systemically accountable, but we are missing Healthwatch. I am disturbed that Healthwatch has been cancelled as the patient advocate, giving the patient’s voice in local areas. Will the Secretary of State reassure us that there will be some way of getting individual advocacy, as well as regulation?

I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s support for the plan. Success has many masters, and I thank him for putting the Carr-Hill formula on the parliamentary agenda through his debate. I can reassure him about a few things. First, what the Chancellor has done in the spending review gives us the advantage of medium-term certainty, so the NHS will now be in the business of medium-term planning with the system, which enables it to make better use of the money that is allocated. Secondly, we are ending Healthwatch—I express my thanks to the people who have worked in Healthwatch for many years—but we are giving power directly to the patients. Alongside that, we are looking at what we can do to strengthen democratic accountability from elected representatives, to ensure that the patient voice and interests are protected.

As an NHS physiotherapist, I warmly welcome the Secretary of State’s statement and the ambition set out in the 10-year plan. In Dudley, we are already seeing the positive changes of a Labour Government in bringing down waiting lists. With renewed focus on community care, will my right hon. Friend commit to empowering allied health professionals to lead the neighbourhood health centres, building on the successful model that we have seen in Suffolk and North East Essex? Does he agree that we need more healthcare on the high streets?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right and it is brilliant to have her expertise represented on the Government Benches. She is right about the importance of physiotherapy, not just for improved and better-quality recovery, but for admission avoidance. I want physios and other allied health professionals to be at the heart of the neighbourhood health service, and I know that she will hold us to account to ensure we deliver.

I also welcome the statement and the 10-year plan, and I offer my full support for most of the elements. Staying focused on the positive, I hope to be permitted to raise three points.

First, Dewsbury and Batley is unfortunately one of the many constituencies with dental deserts. Dewsbury West, a ward with over 20,000 residents, has no dentist, so how will the 10-year plan and the Government address that for my constituents?

Secondly, I fully support the plans to move healthcare into communities. In Dewsbury, we have a local hospital in the heart of the community that, with the right investment, could serve many more. Will the Secretary of State confirm that the Government will build on what we have, rather than fragment it?

Finally, Dewsbury and Batley is home to a wonderfully diverse community, but has some of the most deprived neighbourhoods, with the associated healthcare inequalities. Will the Secretary of State agree to visit my constituency so he can hear from my constituents and healthcare professionals, and ensure that their challenges are addressed?

In that constructive spirit, I can assure the hon. Gentleman that those things are contained in the 10-year plan for health. These changes are only possible because people voted Labour and because we have a Labour Government. In that spirit, he can be assured that in the run-up to the next general election, I will be pounding the streets of Dewsbury.

I call Warinder Juss—not here.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend, his team and the amazing NHS staff on over-delivering on Labour’s promises, and for this amazing, ambitious 10-year plan that will ensure the NHS is fit for the future. I particularly welcome the “My Carer” feature on the NHS app that will allow family and unpaid carers to communicate with the care team for a loved one. Will my right hon. Friend explain how this plan will deliver benefits for disabled people and their carers?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her question: I can tell that she has already read a lot of the plan, not least because she had such a heavy role in shaping it, bringing her expertise to bear as we were deliberating. I also thank her constituents in Shipley, who took part in the engagement and consultation that she did locally; I hope they feel that their fingerprints are on this plan. She talks about the “My Carer” feature of the NHS app, which will make an enormous difference. I hope that the people who tend to be heavier users of health services feel that they have more power, choice, agency and control. That has to be true not just for people with physical disabilities, but people with learning disabilities. We have to ensure that the NHS is genuinely there for everyone, and that everyone has agency, voice, personalisation, power and control—that is what this plan will deliver.

I welcome the 10-year plan; its focus on prevention is right. I notice that there are a number of references to diabetes in the plan, but none to type 1 diabetes. We already have simple blood tests for biomarkers that identify people who are likely to develop type 1 diabetes, and immunotherapy, which can delay onset, is being assessed for NHS use. All the components of a national screening system are already there, so we have the opportunity to change how people are diagnosed with type 1 diabetes and the potential to eliminate life-threatening diabetic ketoacidosis, which can be how people present in hospital and find out that they have got type 1 diabetes. Will the Secretary of State clarify if the references to diabetes screening will be pertinent in relation to type 1 diabetes in specific? Will he meet me and the all-party parliamentary group for diabetes to learn from Italian lawmakers about their national type 1 diabetes screening programme?

I give the hon. Gentleman the assurance that we will be delivering on type 1 diabetes, as well as type 2 diabetes. He is right about the breakthroughs in science that allow us to predict and diagnose faster. Through its emphasis on technology, the plan will deliver wearables that will enable people to track their blood sugar levels in real time and enable insulin to be deployed at precisely the right time, in precisely the right amount, to provide stability, certainty and peace of mind. That will not only be important for adults with type 1 diabetes, but for parents who worry about their children. When they send them off to school or to play with friends, they will have the peace of mind that they can monitor their condition, and be reassured that they will be alerted if something does not look right. That is the peace of mind that everyone deserves and that is what this plan will deliver. I am sure the relevant Minister will be delighted to meet the APPG.

I very much thank the Secretary of State for his statement and the NHS 10-year plan. As someone who represents one of those rural constituencies without an acute hospital, I very much welcome the plan to move from hospitals into communities. The Conservatives broke their promise to deliver a health hub for Buxton in my constituency, and a plan is ready to go. Will the Secretary of State meet with me to discuss the opportunities for that plan to deliver for my local constituents?

As soon as my hon. Friend got to his feet, I knew exactly where the question was going. I was delighted to spend time campaigning for him in his constituency, and I know that the focus on neighbourhood health will be particularly welcome to people living in rural communities just like his. I would be delighted to meet with him to discuss his proposal, not least because he will hound me relentlessly if I say anything other than yes.

In a week that has been quite difficult, it is a real joy to have some good news in the Chamber in the 10-year plan. I thank the Secretary of State very much for that statement and for the positive fashion in which it was delivered. He says that it will deliver a health plan for all, but I have a quick question in relation to care in the community. Patients are taking up beds in hospitals who cannot get home, because the care in the community is not there. There are those who want to go to their homes, but the staff are not there to look after them. As the Secretary of State will know, I always try to do things in a positive fashion. When it comes to finding and training people, will he consider training through schools and colleges for specific roles in care in the community and encourage pupils from a young age to see those as careers that they wish to be part of? I know the Secretary of State will do this, but will he share all that good news with the Minister in the Northern Ireland Assembly?

I can absolutely give the hon. Gentleman that assurance. We will ensure that we are delivering that intermediate care in the community through not just the NHS, but our partners in social care. I have a really good relationship with Mike Nesbitt, my counterpart in Northern Ireland, so I am happy to share our learnings there. The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to emphasise the importance of ensuring that it is not just the sons and daughters of doctors, but more working-class people from backgrounds such as mine who get to go into medicine. That is exactly what this plan will deliver.

It is thanks to the Secretary of State and, indeed, our Chancellor that we already anticipate a £10 million state-of-the-art health hub in Thanet, which is opening this autumn. That will have a community diagnostic centre, expanded GP services, podiatry, cardiac and respiratory teams, MRIs and support for mental health. That is exactly what this 10-year plan is about. I welcome that introduction, especially in a growing community such as Thanet, but what considerations has the Secretary of State given to Chris Whitty’s report into health in coastal communities in the 10-year plan? Coastal communities in particular suffer from high levels of poor health and underperform in terms of services.

I can certainly give my hon. Friend the assurance that Chris Whitty’s work as chief medical officer had a big bearing on our thinking about how we meet the needs of rural and coastal communities and tackle health inequalities. His analysis is clear: we need people not just living longer, but living well for longer. We need to push illness much later into old age so that people can live life to the full until the very end. That must apply to everyone, not just the privileged few. My hon. Friend’s constituents will really benefit from this plan as well as the new facilities coming later this year.

I really welcome this 10-year plan, especially the shift from hospital to community. I am excited by the digital transformation, and I hope it works in the broadband blackspots of South Devon. I will ask the Secretary of State about the shift from sickness to prevention. Will he tell the House what conversations he has had with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Treasury about ringfenced funding for leisure centres, swimming pools, outdoor education centres, safe cycle routes and footpaths? We can do so much more to promote and embed healthy lifestyles, particularly in our children and young people, but it will take investment. We need to spend to save. Is that part of the 10-year plan?

I really welcome that support, and that is an absolutely great question. On the point about connectivity, I will ensure that the Science Secretary receives those representations and dons his skinny jeans and flip-flops and comes down to improve connectivity for her community—he is committed to doing that for people right across the country. The hon. Lady is absolutely right: we have to ensure that people in every part of the country have access to all those things that make life worth living, such as grassroots sport, culture, leisure, recreation, clean air, parks and open spaces. She has my assurance that, working with the Deputy Prime Minister and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, we will bring those opportunities to everyone, not just the wealthiest areas or big cities.

Will the Health Secretary outline how the 10-year plan will quickly deliver on the Government’s aim to go from an analogue to a digital service? That is important to Doncaster hospital, which is still on paper records. Will he also ensure that the deaf community is considered and that BSL and easy-read materials are woven into any digital roll-out?

I can absolutely give my hon. Friend that assurance. The great opportunity for technology is that we can design in accessibility; I had a great meeting here with some of my constituents who suffer from hearing loss. We have a great opportunity for the NHS to once again be the great social leveller, providing quality care to everyone, whatever their background, and personalised care that meets their needs. We need to have better digital connectivity and AI-enabled hospitals. My hon. Friend’s constituents will know how hard she bangs the drum here for investment in her local hospital, and that is very much on my mind.

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and his previous answer on dentistry, but I will push him a little further. My constituency, along with all of Oxfordshire, is an NHS dental desert. Having met with dental providers, they say that the key to changing that is reforming the NHS dental contract. I note that the 10-year plan includes a commitment to doing that, but no timescales are provided. Can the Secretary of State enlighten the House?

Yes, I certainly can. The proposals we are consulting on represent an important step towards the fundamental reform to the dental contract that we committed to in our manifesto, and that will begin this year. There are no perfect payment models. Careful consideration needs to be given to any potential changes in a complex dental system so that we deliver genuine improvements for patients and the profession, but we are committed to working with the British Dental Association. The Minister for Care, my hon. Friend the Member for Aberafan Maesteg (Stephen Kinnock), is working hard to fix the mess left by the previous Government.

On behalf of the small and often oppressed community of health policy geeks, I thank the Secretary of State for giving us a Christmas present in July—I will be pressing Ctrl+F through it all weekend. I also really thank him and his team for threading through this plan a real commitment to the quality of work for the NHS workforce. I can see already some really strong, concrete suggestions for how we can make the working lives of people in the NHS better. Most importantly of all, people in Sittingbourne and Sheppey are really glad to see that the idea of a neighbourhood health service is well fleshed out. Again, with a health policy geek hat on, we know it is the funding and the funding models that really matter, so I really commend the review of the funding formula, particularly towards rural and coastal communities. How will the Secretary of State ensure that with this new funding formula, he and his team at the centre will keep a tight grip on what happens at ICB and other levels closer to the ground to ensure that that funding gets to the areas with the most need?

I am so grateful to my hon. Friend for his support; as he implies, he brings so much expertise to this place. As we embark in this brave new world of devolution of power, resources and control, we keep a close eye on outcomes. I am counting on local communities, Members of Parliament, mayors, councils and local authorities also to ensure that we have democratic accountability and oversight to ensure the resources we provide are spent to the best effect and have a real impact. I pay tribute to the policy geeks of the world in health and social care for their contribution to this 10-year plan. Health geeks of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!

Order. Some 20 Members are still seeking to ask questions, and we have an important debate to follow. The questions are getting longer, and so, I fear, Minister, are the answers. Can I urge brevity again, please?

I also thank my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for a bold and ambitious plan. Over the past few months, I have had the privilege of connecting with some really inspiring people across my constituency, such as Jagdeep Aujla. His Dopamine Warriors boxing club, which the Secretary of State visited some weeks ago, sets a powerful example. Jagdeep’s boxing club offers a safe, empowering space for people living with Parkinson’s to connect with each other, maintain their fitness, and slow the progression of the condition. Will my right hon. Friend outline how the Government’s 10-year health plan will support the shift from hospital to community, so that more support is available on people’s doorsteps, particularly organisations such as the Dopamine Warriors?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend and parliamentary neighbour for his question. He is right that I recently had the joy of visiting Jagdeep and the Dopamine Warriors in my constituency—they do brilliant work, which underscores why we have to work in partnership with community groups and the voluntary sector. They provide great support for patient groups and their families in a way that would not be nearly so good even if the NHS tried to provide it, so I can absolutely assure my hon. Friend that that partnership will be at the heart of the 10-year plan. I also note that he is campaigning for an upgrade to the A&E at Queen’s hospital in Romford. As he knows, I am not empowered to make that decision, but my hon. Friend the Minister for Secondary Care will have heard that case.

I thank the Secretary of State, because with this NHS plan, ambition is back. That ambition matters to my constituents, who for too many years have seen a health service in decline. I brought many of those constituents to a community meeting so that their experience and expertise could be shared and fed straight into this plan. Could the Secretary of State set out how this plan gives power to patients and puts them back in the driving seat?

I thank my hon. Friend and his constituents for the feedback from that event, which I received and is reflected in this plan. There is much in the plan about power to the patient—more ease, convenience, choice and control, not just through the app but through a number of mechanisms, including new patient power payments that will give patients real bite if they are receiving poor-quality care. That is thanks to my hon. Friend and his constituents.

I thank the Secretary of State for the 10-year plan. Moving quickly on the dentistry contract is extremely important to my constituents, but I want to raise the fact that, at the moment, parents in my constituency are frightened. They are frightened about how long it takes them to get diagnoses for their children, particularly in relation to neurodiversity; about the lack of support once they do get those diagnoses; and about the lack of child and adolescent mental health services. They are also frightened that their neurodiverse children are being removed from those services on the basis that autism is apparently regarded by some people in our local services as inherently anxiety-creating and therefore children with that diagnosis do not need mental health support. Can the Secretary of State tell me how my constituents will benefit from this plan when it comes to the support children need with their health?

I thank my hon. Friend and her constituents. She held—I think—four events across her community to feed into this plan, and we really valued that feedback. I hope people feel that their fingerprints are on this plan. It sets out our ambition to make this the healthiest generation of children who ever lived, whether that is through better access to mental health support and services, recognising the importance of meeting neurodiverse need, or the focus on physical activity, good diet, nutrition and access to sport, media and culture for everyone, especially children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds. I hope the plan reflects the ambition we heard from my hon. Friend’s constituents.

I congratulate the Secretary of State and his entire team on their hard work—this document is outstanding, and I look forward to implementing it across Stafford, Eccleshall and the villages. My constituents participated in three consultation events to feed into this project, so it is really important that patient voices are all over it. A specific concern that came through was that 450 systems are used in Stafford hospital for digitisation and patient records, and they do not talk to each other, which is leading to discrepancies in patient care. Can the Secretary of State give me more information about how the improvement in digitisation will improve patient care on the frontline?

I thank my hon. Friend for her support, and her constituents for giving up their time to take part in those events, which fed directly into the plan. I hope they see their input reflected in the results. She is quite right that we need to fix those basic systems and make sure that people across different parts of the NHS are able to interface and join up care around the patient. The capital and tech investment ringfenced by the Chancellor will have a really big impact, and I hope my hon. Friend’s patients and NHS staff will begin to feel that impact.

I put on record my thanks to the Secretary of State for his statement today, and to the Chancellor for the financial and economic work she has put in. Labour Members know that governing well is a team sport, and it is when people in government work together that we succeed best for the people we seek to serve.

Despite the best efforts of important surgeries such as Thistlemoor in my constituency, too many parts of Peterborough are left out as a result of two challenges. The first is the postcode lottery; too many things seem to happen in other parts of our county, and we know that working-class communities are too often left behind. The second challenge is that the NHS is just too complex. Even when we have services in the community, people struggle to know which bit to access—is it the pharmacist, the GP surgery, or the hospital? Can the Secretary of State confirm that the 10-year plan will seek to simplify the system, and to put patients in the driving seat and bureaucracy in the bin?

I can absolutely give my hon. Friend that reassurance. It is about time that we design care around the patient, rather than ask the patient to do the running around on behalf of the NHS. That will be a big shift in practice and culture. Of course, as my hon. Friend says, it is only thanks to the decisions taken by the Chancellor that we are able to match the reform and ambition of this plan with the investment we need. That is why I was delighted to be joined not just by the Prime Minister, but by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor this morning in Stratford to kick off the 10-year plan—not least because she is the one who pays the bills, and we are very grateful to her for it.

One of the issues with the health service that my constituents most often ask me about is the struggle to get basic appointments. That is leading people to the hospital, which is unable to cope with the sheer numbers, and in a populous, fast-growing borough, that is creating unsustainable pressure. As such, I welcome my right hon. Friend’s remarks about the move from hospital to community. Does he agree that getting primary care right is at the centre of getting the NHS right, and can he assure my constituents that they will get what they want: appointments when they need them, as they need them, in their local community?

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend— I know his constituency well, and he has been a powerful voice for his constituents since he arrived in this place. He is absolutely right that we need good general practice and accessible neighbourhood health services that are available to everyone, especially in areas of high need and health inequalities, as we see in the London borough of Newham. I hope his constituents really feel the impact of this plan as we roll it out during this Parliament and across the next decade.

The Secretary of State mentioned community health teams in Cornwall taking services directly to people, even in their homes. I am so pleased with the focus on how to deliver healthcare in sparsely populated rural and coastal areas. Can the Secretary of State confirm that this focus will run through the 10-year plan, so that across the country people can access care as equally as possible at local level—and specialist services such as robotic surgery and mental health emergency hubs—no matter where they live?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I have been delighted to spend time with her in her constituency to make sure that this Government understand the needs of every part of the country and different types of community. We need to ensure that, when we think about health services, the pitch we have in our mind’s eye is meeting the needs not just of big cities or large towns, but of rural and coastal communities that have been left behind for too long. I hope that my hon. Friend’s constituents will really feel the benefit of the innovation that is at the heart of this 10-year plan, and of the focus on community services and neighbourhood health. From what they have seen so far, they can trust that if we do not deliver for them, my hon. Friend will be the first to tell us.

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement today. I welcome the move to community delivery, greater accountability of providers and ICBs, and power to the patients. As a research scientist—I declare an interest as an unpaid visiting researcher at the Francis Crick Institute— I welcome the recognition of the need for scientists and diagnostics to get ahead of disease. What conversations has the Secretary of State had, and what actions has he taken, with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and other regulatory bodies in relation to the amazing new technologies, devices and drugs and how we can get them into the NHS faster?

We are so lucky to have my hon. Friend’s scientific expertise on our Benches, and we are also lucky that, despite being elected, she is doing research on behalf of the country in her spare time—goodness knows where she finds it. We welcome her public service. We need to see investment in new medicines and technology as an investment rather than a cost. That is how we deliver better care, better value for taxpayers and better outcomes, and it is how we close health inequalities. This is the most exciting revolution taking place in the world, and it is happening right here in England. We have got to make sure that the NHS benefits from it.

This weekend will mark the 77th anniversary of the national health service, and I take this opportunity to thank all NHS staff at Stepping Hill hospital in Stockport. I pay tribute to the work of the British Dental Association, because week in, week out, Members from all parts of the House receive correspondence on NHS dentistry and the lack of it. I take this opportunity to invite the Secretary of State to visit Stockport. I know that he comes to Bury often, so when he is up in Greater Manchester, will he join me in Stockport to speak to patients, parents and frontline dental staff about the crisis?

My hon. Friend is right about the importance of dental services, and I hope that his constituents begin to feel the benefit. I also know he is leading the charge on the campaign for Stepping Hill hospital. He regularly raises it with me and other Ministers, and I would be delighted to try to visit his constituency as soon as my diary allows.

I thank the Secretary of State for this welcome news. The Sir Robert Peel centre, part of the University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS trust, is now running at full throttle, with a range of diagnostic services and treatment options. I congratulate the trust and the Minister on opening that community diagnostic centre, which, as part of the NHS 10-year plan, will transform lives and access to speedy healthcare. Will he celebrate this hospital’s transformation to unlock more than 1,000 treatments a week in Tamworth and the villages?

I am so grateful to my hon. Friend for that question, as it gives me the chance to say an enormous thank you to everyone involved. I hope that people are beginning to feel the benefits and will see the change that comes from having a great Labour MP and a Labour Government who deliver the change that our country desperately needs.

My constituents raise issues with accessing the NHS, particularly local GPs and primary services, at every chance they have. I welcome the bold, big ambition of this 10-year health strategy. Can the Secretary of State outline how it will make a big difference in our small towns and villages?

Neighbourhood health cannot just be about large towns and cities. It has to meet the needs of every community, and the approach we are taking, with care closer to home or, indeed, in the home will benefit everyone, but it will disproportionately benefit people such as those in my hon. Friend’s constituency. That is the benefit of having a great Labour MP like her and a Labour Government delivering results.

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and the 10-year plan, which I welcome. I am already seeing the benefits of this Government’s commitment to reforming the NHS in my constituency, with a second linear accelerator radiotherapy machine coming to Southend hospital and investment in four of my GP surgeries, with new space being developed for more appointments. As he knows, however, I care greatly about men’s mental health. How does this 10-year plan begin to address the challenges we face in that area?

I am delighted with the work that my hon. Friend is doing to assist us with the development of a new men’s health strategy, including a focus on men’s mental health, which he has raised so powerfully on more than one occasion in this House. I hope he will be pleased with the results. By working closely with him, voluntary sector organisations and the NHS, we will make sure we get it right.

I hugely welcome the NHS 10-year plan, and its recognition that victims of domestic abuse are more likely to experience worse NHS access and worse outcomes, and will die younger. Domestic abuse costs the NHS £2.3 billion a year. Will the Secretary of State agree to work with Standing Together and other domestic abuse charities to ensure that the NHS treats domestic abuse as the public health emergency that it is?

I am so grateful to my hon. Friend for that question, and for the expertise she brings to the House on this issue. She is absolutely right: it is the NHS’s responsibility to meet the needs of everyone, whatever their background and whatever the circumstances of their requirement for access to the NHS. That is so often where eyes first spot the telltale signs of violence against women and girls and domestic abuse. It is not the job of the Home Office to tackle this issue; it is the job of all of us across Government. She has my assurance that I will work closely with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary to make sure that the NHS plays its part in keeping women and girls safe, alive and well.

I warmly welcome the Government’s 10-year plan. It is a proud day to sit on these Benches. I also welcome the Government’s commitment to rebuilding Frimley Park hospital in my community in wave 1 of the new hospitals programme. The brilliant staff there, who are currently working in a hospital riddled with reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete, deserve that more than anyone. Can the Secretary of State help me out by bringing to life what healthcare will look like for people in my community of Aldershot, Farnborough, Blackwater, Hawley and Yateley over the next decade as a result of this plan?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that question, and to her constituents for taking part in her local engagement event. This plan will ensure that more people receive the right care in the right place at the right time. It will deliver more neighbourhood health services under one roof, and more choice, convenience, power and control over healthcare. It will deliver access and support at the touch of a button, and personalised care. We are completely changing how we deliver healthcare in this century and meeting the needs of everyone. Thinking particularly about her constituency, we are making sure that we are supporting our armed forces, veterans and their families, so that they receive great outcomes, thanks to a great Labour MP in Aldershot and a Labour Government who deliver. I know that she will hold our feet to the fire to make sure that we deliver.

I thank the Health Secretary for his statement, and I promise not to lobby him too much on the potential move of the UK Health Security Agency to Harlow, although perhaps I should also lobby for a neighbourhood health centre. Instead, can I ask him to set out how the 10-year plan will ensure a shift from sickness to prevention? Medical professionals in my local hospital, the Princess Alexandra, emphasised that issue when I met them recently.

My hon. Friend is right that we need to not just treat sickness, but prevent illness. That was a strong message that we got from the public. He will see lots of good stuff on prevention in the plan, and I know that he will welcome it. On the location of the UK Health Security Agency, he may have inadvertently misled the House: he said he did not want to lobby me too much, but that is absolutely not true; he will not leave me alone on this issue. He lobbies me every single day. I can assure him we will make a decision on that issue shortly.

I am sure that the hon. Member for Harlow will wish to correct the record.

I welcome the 10-year plan, and I thank the Secretary of State for giving my constituents in Watford the opportunity to feed into it through the consultation. Does he agree that the Tories accepted decline in the NHS as inevitable, but it takes a Labour Government to get the NHS back on its feet?

Absolutely, and the people of Watford can see the difference a Labour Government can make, thanks to their sending a Labour MP to the House. They saw what happened when they sent a Tory, and they cannot send a Liberal Democrat to this place and trust them to deliver. They need a Labour Government to deliver Labour change. I am delighted that my hon. Friend is here, and we are making a real difference together. Thanks to the engagement events he held with his constituents in Watford, their ideas are reflected in this plan. That is thanks to their hard work and his advocacy.

It falls on each Labour Government to reform and renew the NHS in the service of patients, and that includes mental health patients; from my consultations, I know that they are a key priority for the people of Sunderland Central. I welcome the plan’s emphasis on empowering patients by providing them with information and choice through the NHS app, including on waiting times, but the Secretary of State will know that information about mental health waiting times is often poor, as are the waiting times themselves. In the 10-year plan, will he commit to making sure that empowerment applies equally to people seeking mental health services and those seeking physical health services?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We in this place are so lucky to have his expertise and his leadership of the Back-Bench health and social care committee of the parliamentary Labour party. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and I am concerned that we do not give enough profile to paediatric waits and mental health waits. With more transparency, information and access, we will be able to demonstrate improvements over the course of this Parliament and the next decade.

Families affected by failing maternity services were ignored for far too long, and we have a system of accountability that is broken. I am pleased that the Secretary of State’s plan has a strong focus on patient outcomes and experiences, and that maternity care will be at the forefront. I am also pleased to see that the single patient records will be rolled out in maternity services first. It is vital that women feel heard and seen throughout their pregnancy journey, and that crucial information no longer falls through the cracks of numerous systems that do not sync up.

I express my heartfelt thanks to the Secretary of State for really listening, for speaking to families across the country, and for coming to Nottinghamshire twice. I can honestly say that his reaction moved me. Not only was he listening; he cares and is determined that things will change, and they will. As chair of the APPG on maternity, and as a harmed mother, I thank him. Can he tell me a bit more about how maternity services will be incorporated into his plan for a neighbourhood health service?

I am so grateful to my hon. Friend for all the work she does as chair of the all-party parliamentary group, for the personal and professional experience that she brings to this House, and for the wisdom, advice and insight that she has offered to help me make better decisions. I am absolutely determined to work with families, especially those who have suffered such grave injustice at the hands of the NHS. It is a wonderful institution, but sometimes when it fails, it fails spectacularly. The culture of denial and cover-up cannot be allowed to persist, and I will work with my hon. Friend to make sure that we end it.

On neighbourhood health, it is so important that we engage with families early, especially where they may be at greater risk of complicated pregnancy or harm, because we know this is an area of grotesque health inequalities. After birth, it is really important that we have strong health visiting, and care in the community and the home that does not just consider the interests of the baby, but asks questions of the mother. How is she feeling? How is she recovering? Is her partner coping? We have to look at the whole family, and I am sure we will get it right. I am determined to get this right, and it will be in no small part thanks to my hon. Friend’s leadership and support.

I thank the Secretary of State for both his statement and the 10-year plan. I am delighted that residents in Dartford were able to play a full part in shaping its priorities through our consultation meeting in February. They will be really pleased to see not only the additional GP appointments, but the pressure being taken off their local hospital, Darent Valley, through the provision of better and more community services. The hospital was designed with a much smaller community in mind and is now suffering the consequences. Can the Secretary of State give me an idea of the pace of the roll-out of neighbourhood health centres? We could certainly do with one in Dartford.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question—representation duly received. I reassure him that one of the ways we will ease the pressure valve on our hospitals is by doing more neighbourhood health. That helps to drive admission avoidance, speed up delayed discharges, and get much more effective flow of patients through hospitals. That is our commitment. We aim to roll out 40 to 50 neighbourhood health centres over the course of this Parliament, and if we can go faster, we will. I have no doubt that my hon. Friend, as a strong representative for Dartford, will make more representations to us shortly.

I thank the Secretary of State and everyone involved in creating this well-designed and excellent 10-year plan. There is so much good stuff in it, but I particularly like the approach of shifting treatment from hospitals to neighbourhoods and homes. Many of my constituents in Stevenage have been taken to Lister hospital when they do not want or need to be there, but we have an alternative. The Minister for Social Care and my hon. Friend the Member for Welwyn Hatfield (Andrew Lewin) recently joined me on a visit to the Hertfordshire community NHS trust’s “hospital at home” service. Is that something that the Secretary of State and the health team are determined to roll out?

I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. The change will mean that people in Stevenage start to feel real improvements in their ability to access the NHS. Of course, that is in no small part thanks to this country’s amazing life sciences sector, which has its beating heart in Stevenage.

I add my congratulations to my right hon. Friend, his team and NHS staff, who have put this plan together so that the NHS does not just survive but thrives. Last weekend, I met a family in Winsford who, that morning, had received a bill of £180,000 for their mother’s care. The daughter said to me, “Andrew, I don’t know how I can possibly pay this.” The previous Government failed to get a grip on the issue. The plans that the Secretary of State has set out to increase carer’s allowance and the disabled facilities grant will make a big difference, as will the introduction of fair pay agreements across the adult social care sector. Can he confirm that he will do everything he can to accelerate and implement the outcome of Baroness Casey’s cross-party commission, so that the issue is resolved once and for all?

I can certainly give my hon. Friend that assurance. It is precisely because of examples of the sort that he has shared with the House that we have to get this right, so that we relieve families of such catastrophic care costs. Just as the NHS replaced fear with high-quality care for all, we have to alleviate the fear of families who require care, because the situation that he describes blights too many families across our country.

May I briefly commend the Health Secretary for his comments on the morning media about events in this place yesterday? Empathy is in short supply in politics, and we could do with a bit more of it.

I really welcome the 10-year health plan, and specifically the focus on outcomes and the transformation of the NHS into a neighbourhood health service, complete with health centres. The plan states the criterion for deciding the first locations of these health centres: they will be the areas with the greatest need. Will the Health Secretary expand on that criterion, and perhaps tell me what I need to do to get a health centre for Leeds South West and Morley?

I knew exactly where that question was going, because my hon. Friend has been such a strong champion of his constituency since he arrived in this place. I am committed to rolling out neighbourhood health across the country, and to making sure that we particularly benefit the communities with the greatest need that are the most poorly served. This is in no small part possible thanks to the leadership of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the wise decisions that she has taken. Not only have we delivered investment in the NHS, but interest rates have fallen four times, wages are finally rising at a higher rate than the cost of living, and we have the fastest-growing economy in the G7. That is the leadership that we need from the Chancellor, and it is here to stay.

Finally, and with thanks for his patience, I call Richard Baker.

Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker—persistence pays off.

Will my right hon. Friend assure me that he will report regularly to this House on progress against this excellent plan? I hope that will help us to evidence the case for investment in community health facilities in Scotland, which have long been promised but not been delivered by the SNP, including the much-needed new health centre in Lochgelly in my constituency.

I can absolutely give my hon. Friend that assurance. I just feel so sorry for him, because he comes here to stand up for his constituents, knowing full well that while they have a Labour Government who are delivering the biggest increase in investment to the devolved Administrations since devolution began, the SNP, which has been in government for almost two decades, is squandering the money and the opportunity. People will not get change in his constituency, or across the rest of Scotland, if they face more of the same from the SNP. Scotland needs an alternative, and Scotland’s NHS needs an alternative. That alternative is Scottish Labour and the leadership of Anas Sarwar and Jackie Baillie, and it cannot come soon enough.

May I thank the Secretary of State for answering in excess of 65 questions, and the shadow Secretary of State for being in attendance throughout the entire proceedings?