NHS, defence, education and more in focus for voters in government's Spending Review
Chancellor Rachel Reeves is facing more difficult choices in the Spending Review on Wednesday.She will sets the budgets for all government departments over the next few years.The review will confirm how much taxpayers' money will be spent on the NHS, defence, police, education and other public services used by millions, as well as how much money the government plans to invest in projects like new public transport.As she makes her final preparations, people living in Cleckheaton in West Yorkshire outlined what they think her priority should be.
'The NHS is on its knees'
Melissa Marley, 32, has spent the last two years studying at the University of Huddersfield to become a midwife but has quit her course after amassing debt of £60,000 and said there was "no hope for jobs at the end of it".The mother-of-three would like the chancellor to put more money into the NHS because it is "on its knees" and added "people abroad would kill for a system like that, so it needs protecting". Originally from Wakefield, she went back into education in 2021 to provide a better life for her children.She began training as a nurse in 2022 before training as a midwife in 2023.As well as £20,000 of tuition fees, she also owes about £40,000 in her maintenance grant accrued through her studies over the past few years.She was originally going to defer due to health issues but decided to stop her course and is now hoping to become a maternity support worker.This role supports midwives, rather than being a midwife herself.Melissa said the lack of jobs in midwifery was "sad because there are so many people putting so much work in. "They are working hard, having to miss times with their family, their children and then to have nothing at the end of it is sad".
'A less stable world'
Pensioner John Addison agreed that a big part of the Spending Review had to be more funding for the NHS .He said that it was "hard work getting appointments".Mr Addison expressed his concern about spending on defence - and how more money was needed for that. He explained that he worried about the future for his grandchildren and younger people growing up in a less stable world.He said that the Army had "been run down lately so we need to up it a bit because you never know what is around the corner with what's going off in the world." Earlier this month, a British defence review published recommendations which welcomed the government's ambition to spend 3% of Gross Domestic Product by 2034 but warned "as we live in more turbulent times it may be necessary to go faster."Several Nato allies have already committed to spending more than 5%.
School buildings 'in a terrible state'
Bill and Pauline Wardlaw would like to see funds focused on the education system and investing in the future. Bill was particularly concerned about problems with school buildings.He said they were in "a terrible state" which meant "children are going to school in inadequate buildings and a lot of money should be spent getting them up to a decent standard".Pauline agreed with her husband but would also money spent on ensuring infrastructure around new housing estates is in place. She said when new housing is built "they need to make sure there is provision for the people that they are going to put in those houses - like doctors, education, schools etc because it is just not there".Ms Wardlaw was also frustrated with trying to get a GP appointment: "It's three weeks before you can see a doctor unless you ring up at 08:00 and then you are in a queue."
'Support for mums is needed'
Beth Flannagan-Jones was out with her 16 month old daughter Maeve.She wanted to see more cash targeted at activities and support groups for mothers and babies. She said toddler groups could help mums who felt "alone".Ms Flannagan-Jones said there were "a couple of options but many of them are private and you have to pay for them"."If you have not got a lot of money and are on a budget I think a few more council groups and mum groups are missing," she added.
'Green investments need oversight'
Pensioner David Lumb acknowledged the cuts to winter fuel allowance had been damaging to Labour party as some older people relied on the payment. He backed a more targeted approach to the benefit - which seemed to chime with the chancellor.She announced on Monday changes to the level the benefit would be paid at, meaning 75% of pensioners would now be eligible. His biggest priority was the NHS citing "the way the nation relied" on the service during the pandemic. However, Mr Lumb said he would also like to see more investment in green initiatives, but when it comes to home insulation he said it depended on "how efficiently it is done". "Quite often the government sponsor these things and they aren't properly monitored," he added.
Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
an hour ago
- Times
‘RFK Jr is a disaster': Staff describe chaos in ‘anti-science' regime
For the workers of Building 21, keeping a low profile is considered the best way to survive. Zoom meetings are avoided out of fear they are being secretly recorded. Conversations about budgets and policies are held in soundproof offices, as if they were matters of national security. Many employees carry small notebooks with them, jotting down notes instead of logging them on a computer. The desks of several sacked colleagues are empty — save for the few who have left family photos and possessions behind in case a judge rules they can return. It sounds like a scene out of Nineteen Eighty-four — yet this is the headquarters of the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Georgia. Here, staff do everything they can to avoid the twentysomething officials from the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) who stalk the building's corridors, said a global health specialist at Building 21, who asked that his name not be used. 'There is a constant sense that we're being watched and monitored,' the source said. 'Doge leadership are located several floors above but they have this omnipotent presence … We're counted when we swipe our badges into the building.' Ever since Robert F Kennedy Jr was appointed health secretary in February, more than 10,000 staff — many with decades of experience — have been fired. Now, the tens of thousands of health workers and scientists still employed by the US government feel like their lives have been turned upside down, according to ten current and former staff at the CDC, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and National Institutes of Health (NIH), speaking to The Times. Under instruction from Kennedy and Doge, health priorities have been reset, longstanding scientific norms disrupted and thousands of research programmes cancelled because of their perceived 'wokeness', officials said. 'RFK Jr is a disaster,' said one CDC grant specialist who joined the agency within the past five years. 'He is completely dismantling things to the point where the damage is going to become irreparable.' • Tom Whipple: Trump's tragic war on science could be an opportunity for Britain Kennedy's vision to 'make America healthy again' has sparked the most significant transformation of the country's health infrastructure in generations. And the health secretary's allies argue this reform is long overdue. But in interviews with The Times, sources describe scenes of dysfunction and chaos that threaten to make America sicker. Decades-old research centres dedicated to preventing chronic diseases like cancer and heart disease are being shuttered, one source said. Another claimed that layers of bureaucracy had been added to the approval process for grants, even though Doge's stated aim is to improve government efficiency. A third source said funding was so short that staff were rifling through others' desks for stationery: 'We are literally going through the offices of our fired colleagues to scavenge supplies like paper and pens as we no longer have the ability to buy those types of things.' Asked to comment on the claims, Andrew Nixon, director of communications at the US Department of Health and Human Services, said: 'Secretary Kennedy was appointed to drive bold, necessary reforms in a system long plagued by inefficiency and complacency. 'Streamlining outdated programmes, ensuring fiscal discipline and demanding transparency are not attacks on science — they are a defence of it. Secretary Kennedy remains committed to evidence-based leadership that serves the American people — not the preservation of status-quo bureaucracies.' Kennedy's crusade to overhaul America's vaccine policies has generated the most controversy. Earlier this month he abruptly fired all 17 members of the advisory committee on immunisation practices (ACIP), a group that has reviewed vaccine trial data and advised the government on which jabs to approve for more than six decades. The former independent presidential candidate, who has claimed for years that some vaccines are unsafe and could cause autism, said the committee was hobbled by conflicts of interest. Firing its members en masse, he said, would 're-establish public confidence in vaccine science'. Days later he hired eight new advisers, including a Covid conspiracy theorist and prominent critic of pandemic-era lockdowns. Dr Charlotte Moser, one of the 17 sacked experts, said vaccines were being 'politicised' under Kennedy. 'My fear at this moment is for the health of the people of the United States if vaccines become less available,' she told The Times in her first public interview since her dismissal. She pointed to the removal of Covid-19 vaccines from the list of jabs recommended for pregnant women and children — a decision that was made last month without any input from Moser and her colleagues, and which 'does not align with the science', she said. Dr Yvonne Maldonado, another former committee member, warned that 'the firings, disruption and the chaos' of Kennedy's administration were 'incredibly damaging' and unlikely to benefit public health. 'I can't think that these downstream impacts are going to be good ones,' she said in her first public comments. month Kennedy announced 'Generation Gold Standard' — a $500 million initiative to develop vaccines using technology dating from the 1950s. Scientists fear it marks a step back from newer, more innovative vaccine technologies like the mRNA platform, which was used for several highly effective Covid vaccines but has been demonised by antivaxers, including the organisation that Kennedy once chaired, Children's Health Defence. An NIH source with knowledge of the initiative said the senior leadership had bypassed all the 'typical internal scientific review, discussions and grant-making processes' to launch the programme. The source said Kennedy was 'fixated on a link between vaccines and autism' and described the programme as a 'waste of money'. 'He's dropping half a billion dollars on God knows what,' said the NIH source, who asked not to be named because he is still working for the agency. • Meet the antivax whisperer fighting the vaccine slump Preventing chronic disease is one of the cornerstones of Kennedy's mission. In proposals that are widely supported, he has pledged to improve the quality of American produce, crack down on ultra-processed foods, detoxify the environment, diminish people's dependence on drugs and promote cleaner, healthier lifestyles. But insiders say the teams of experts needed to achieve these aims are being dismantled. 'He's shooting himself in the foot,' said a federal worker who was recently fired from the CDC's global health centre. Earlier this year the CDC's childhood lead-poisoning prevention programme was shuttered — despite one in two American toddlers showing detectable levels of lead, a neurotoxin that can cause cognitive impairments and developmental issues, in their blood. No reason was given for the programme's closure. It meant the CDC was unable to help when Wisconsin requested formal aid to tackle a growing lead-contamination crisis in its schools in March. 'Due to the complete loss of our lead programme, we will be unable to support you with this,' the CDC said in response. Kennedy later said the lead programme's 26-person team would be rehired, but one CDC source close to the situation told The Times: 'Those folks are not back yet.' It is also understood that the Prevention Research Centres (PRC) programme — a network of 20 research hubs dedicated to chronic disease prevention in poorer communities in the United States — is to be closed after its team of federal scientists was fired in April. 'They're saying that they're just going to cancel the entire programme,' a CDC source with knowledge of discussions said. Universities and clinics partnered with the PRC programme, like Georgia State University and the Arkansas Centre for Women's Health, have been 'left in the dark about what happens next, with no one available to answer their questions'. Established in 1984 and renewed last year for another five years, the programme is likely to have prevented thousands of premature deaths from obesity, addiction, diabetes and cancer. 'It's one of the country's most vital and important research programs,' the CDC source said. At the FDA, experts responsible for inspecting factories to ensure food products are safe have been hamstrung by the mass firing of project managers, administrators and communication specialists, according to one source from the agency's human foods programme. 'These are the people who keep the day-to-day operations running,' the source said. Inspectors are now expected to book flights and hotels for assignments using their own credit cards, but because it can take weeks to get reimbursed many are reluctant to travel, the FDA source said. He added that a hiring freeze and funding constraints had made it harder for laboratories to analyse samples, further slowing the inspection process. 'The erosion of the oversight will eventually result in [food producers] cutting corners, maybe not being caught as quickly,' said the source, who asked to remain anonymous. 'As a result, things are going to slip and people will get sick.' • RFK Jr and Dr Oz are on a mission to save Canadian ostriches With Kennedy unable to pursue his vision of reform amid the disruption, questions are being raised over who really is in charge of the nation's health. One source speculated that it is Russell Vought, the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, who is calling the shots. 'It's unclear to me how much RFK is actually in charge versus other Trump appointees, like Vought,' said a CDC programme co-ordinator with more than ten years at the agency. 'Kennedy clearly has certain ideas he's interested in but at this point it seems more about cutting programmes than anything else.' Despite the push to save money and improve efficiency, three sources criticised Kennedy's team of Doge officials for adding extra layers of bureaucracy to the processing of CDC grants. Every time a grant recipient wishes to make a drawdown from their funding allocation they must now fill out a questionnaire, which gets sent to Doge for final approval. Previously, grant recipients who had been meticulously assessed and cleared for funding could access their money whenever they wanted. 'It's the exact opposite of efficiency,' the CDC grants specialist said. Among staff who have been fired — but whose contracts remain in limbo as federal judges review whether Kennedy's mass terminations are lawful — many said they had no desire to return to an administration they accused of being anti-science. 'There's been a number of different steps that we could take to potentially get back into the agency and I haven't taken any of them,' said the worker fired from the CDC global health centre. 'What this administration is doing, whether it's RFK, Trump or Doge, is so antithetical to my own values that I can't work there any more.' As for those continuing to labour under Kennedy's regime, there is not much hope for the future. 'It's the perpetual anxiety, it's the lack of knowing anything that is going on. There is no plan in place,' said the global health specialist in Building 21. 'This will have real consequences for people both here in America and overseas. It breaks my heart.'
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Sir Ian McGeechan: Cancer treatment has worked
Sir Ian McGeechan has given a positive update on his cancer diagnosis, saying 'the treatment has worked'. The British and Irish Lions legend revealed he had been diagnosed with prostate cancer in an interview with Telegraph Sport last month. The Scot, who was Lions head coach for four tours, said then that he had undergone six weeks of radiotherapy treatment, and would have to wait another six weeks to discover whether it had been successful. Speaking to fellow Telegraph columnist Will Greenwood during Sky Sports' coverage of the opening Lions game against Argentina, McGeechan revealed he had since received good news about the condition. Asked about his health, McGeechan answered: 'All good, thank you, the treatment has worked. Fine.' Host Alex Payne added: 'So glad to hear that Geech has had the all clear'. McGeechan is perhaps the ultimate Lions legend after his unparalleled career both as a player and coach. The 78-year-old was inundated with messages after his Telegraph interview, with the game of rugby uniting to wish him well. McGeechan has been coaching at Doncaster Knights as he maintains his illustrious career in the game, some 51 years after he first went on a Lions tour as a player in 1974, before being selected again in 1977. McGeechan was then head coach in 1989, 1993, 1997 and 2009, as well as coach of the midweek side in 2005. When revealing his cancer diagnosis, McGeechan said he hoped his honesty would inspire others to get tested. 'I don't want to make a big thing of it, but it is important to get the message out about urging people to get tested,' he said. 'I said that to our players here. I said to them that they make sure they get themselves tested. If you are younger, it is more important. 'Hopefully this interview can be educational. What I would say to people is don't back off it. It is a blood test, it is not what you always think. Just get it done. I have good people looking after me. It is the very good side of the NHS. The staff of the Bexley Cancer Wing at St James's Hospital in Leeds have been brilliant. 'When I had my last treatment, from the receptionist to the radiographer, they all said: 'Well done, good luck, have a happy time.' Everyone. They all knew. When they are looking up your details and you are going on to your next step, it says which number of treatment is it, and it is what they say to every person when they get to their last treatment, which I think is great. That support and the environment is so positive. What will be, will be.'
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
NHS could face cuts under assisted dying law, warns Streeting
NHS services could face cuts to cover the cost of carrying out assisted deaths, the Health Secretary has warned. Under the Bill passed on Friday, the NHS will be expected to carry out the assisted dying procedures. Analysis suggests that implementation of assisted dying may cost the health service close to half a billion pounds within a decade, with each death costing the taxpayer more than £15,000. Assisted dying is set to be legalised in England and Wales after a historic vote saw it voted through by a majority of 23 MPs. However, Wes Streeting – who voted against the Bill – is understood to be deeply concerned about the impact it might have on an overstretched NHS. Speaking ahead of the vote, he warned: 'There isn't money allocated to set up the service in the Bill', while stressing that the Government would respect the decision of the House. Previously, he had warned there would be 'choices and trade-offs' to make, saying 'any new service comes at the expense of other competing pressures and priorities'. Last week, the Health Secretary said the NHS was 'in a fight for its life' as he described his mission to turn the service around. A number of MPs who opposed the Bill have raised concerns that assisted dying could take resources away from patients. On Tuesday, Dame Siobhain McDonagh, a Labour MP who voted against the legislation, said it could become 'the Trojan horse that breaks the NHS', saying it would 'rob our stretched NHS of much-needed resources'. The impact assessment of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill estimates that up to 28,317 people will die by state assisted suicide within the first 10 years of rollout. This rises from 647 in year one to more than 4,500 by 2038, and could mean costs of £429 million for the NHS over the decade. The spending includes educating all health and social care staff, training the doctors and nurses involved in the assisted dying service, setting up a regulator, as well as the costs of the lethal drugs themselves. Training staff is set to be the biggest cost – especially as the service is created. This could cost up to £35.5 million in the first year if all involved got the highest level of training available with no one opting out. There would then be recurring annual costs of between £10-22 million. Staff costs could reach £72 million over 10 years, with up to seven staff working for 32 hours per assisted death, it concludes. None of the calculations include the lost productivity and knock-on effects of the work the doctors are no longer able to carry out as a result. The impact assessment puts the cost of the drugs required at around £15 per person. However, independent experts have said it is highly likely to cost more. The Government also predicts a regulator and panel to assess cases would cost up to £13.6 million every year to run. The assessment suggests that overall, the Government could save money as a result of the earlier deaths, with overall savings of more than £640 million. Some of these savings could be made by the NHS. By 2038, health services could save up to £71.5 million a year on end-of-life care, because of the savings from not providing costly hospital care for cancer. Assisted dying is now on course to be available by 2029. Adults with a terminal illness and less than six months to live will be eligible under the new law. The law passed despite widespread opposition, with opponents raising concerns over the dropping of a requirement for a High Court judge to sign off on all assisted dying cases. Critics also warned that the law would 'normalise the choice of death over life, care, respect and love'.
