NHS has ‘culture of cover-up' over failures, Health Secretary says

He told MPs there is 'too much of that happening' in the NHS, and that reputations are protected instead of patients being told the truth.
The minister's comments came after Labour MP Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) told him about the experience of a woman in his constituency who suffered from nerve damage after a hip operation, but was told her pain was 'common'.
Mr Moon said: 'A couple of weeks ago at my constituency surgery, through the tears, my constituent Amy explained how, following a hip operation in 2008, she suffered progressive nerve damage due to repeated failures in diagnosis, referral and treatment.
'Despite raising concerns for years, she was told her pain was common.
'A nerve test in 2015 confirmed damage and further tests last year showed a significant deterioration. After 17 years, she's only now been offered surgery.
'All Amy wants to know is what steps are being taken to ensure that no other patient is left permanently disabled due to such long and systemic failures.'
Responding, Mr Streeting said: 'Can I first of all, on behalf of the NHS, apologise to his constituent.
'That is a totally intolerable situation, but sadly not rare or exceptional.
'There's too much of that happening and a culture of cover-up and covering reputations, rather than being honest with patients about failures.
'We are changing the culture, safety is at the heart of the 10-year plan, and I'd be delighted to talk to him further about his constituent's case.'
Elsewhere during health and social care oral questions on Tuesday, the Government was challenged on the difficulties that pharmacies are facing.
Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden (Lucy North/PA)
Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden (South Devon) told MPs the 'current funding model doesn't take into account the lower footfall and the limited referral rates that are common in rural areas'.
She said: 'If a pharmacy in a small market town closes, it can cause extreme difficulties for people to access advice and medicines, particularly where there is little or no public transport and they have to go a long way.'
Conservative shadow health minister Dr Luke Evans raised the cap on funded consultation appointments that pharmacies can schedule through the Pharmacy First Scheme.
He said: 'Once they hit that cap, they are no longer paid the £17 per consultation.
'That, in turn, may mean patients will either be turned away or the pharmacist has to take the hit and has to pay for it themselves.'
Care minister Stephen Kinnock replied: 'The pharmacy sector is facing huge challenges after massive cuts over the last 14 years. We're beginning to rebuild, but there are particular challenges for rural pharmacies.
'We are looking at comprehensive reform in the pharmacy sector around better use of technology, hub-and-spoke dispensing and a range of other options which would enable better remote dispensing for rural pharmacies.'
He told Dr Evans that the 'record uplift' of £3.1 billion for the pharmacy sector was coming in 'after years of underfunding, incompetence and neglect' from the Conservatives, and that the allocation of funding will be looked at in their reforms.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

North Wales Chronicle

30 minutes ago

• North Wales Chronicle

UK must push for diplomatic solution following US strikes on Iran, says Swinney

The Scottish First Minister's response to the developments in the Middle East came after Sir Keir Starmer urged Iran to return to negotiations. UK minister Douglas Alexander said the Government 'has been putting contingencies in place' as the region braces for any potential retaliation from Iran. US President Donald Trump said three key nuclear sites in Iran were 'completely and fully obliterated' in the military strikes. The US is thought to have used B-2 stealth bombers to drop bunker-busting munitions on the sites – including the deeply-buried Fordo facility – as well as 30 Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from submarines. The US-UK base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean is not thought to have been used in the operation. Posting on X, Mr Swinney said: 'The Middle East conflict has reached an alarmingly greater level of danger after the US attacks on Iran. 'The conflict must be stopped by a diplomatic solution delivered through the international community. And the UK Government must insist on that now.' The Prime Minister had earlier said Iran should 'return to the negotiating table', noting the region remains 'volatile'. The Middle East conflict has reached an alarmingly greater level of danger after the US attacks on Iran. The conflict must be stopped by a diplomatic solution delivered through the international community. And the U.K. Government must insist on that now. — John Swinney (@JohnSwinney) June 22, 2025 He said: 'Iran's nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security. 'Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat.' Former Scottish first minister Humza Yousaf was critical of the Prime Minister's response. He posted on social media: 'An awful statement from the PM, which ignores our collective responsibility to uphold international law. 'Supporting illegal military action in Iran, and gas-lighting us about an imminent nuclear threat, is hauntingly reminiscent of the lies told in the run up to the Iraq war.' During a protest march in London, Mr Yousaf had earlier accused the UK Government of 'abusing' anti-terror laws against the Palestine Action group, which vandalised two aircraft at RAF Brize Norton. Iran's nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security. Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat. The situation in the Middle East remains volatile and stability in the region is a priority. We call… — Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) June 22, 2025 Trade policy minister Mr Alexander, who is the MP for Lothian East and a former international development minister, spoke to the BBC's Sunday Show. He said: 'I understand that people have woken up this morning to the news that was breaking overnight with a real sense of concern. 'I want to assure your viewers that the British Government has been putting contingencies in place. 'There have been a whole series of meetings, I and other have been attending Cobra meetings in the course of the week.' He said plans are being put in place to move UK nationals in affected countries to safety, stressing the UK 'took no part in this military action'.

Reuters

31 minutes ago

• Reuters

UK could boost growth by radically reshaping the Treasury: Peacock

LONDON, June 20 (Reuters) - UK finance minister Rachel Reeves insists higher economic growth is her top priority, but the government's current plan to address the country's chronically low investment is unlikely to be ambitious enough. What may be needed is a structural rethink of the finance ministry itself. Reeves has adjusted her fiscal rules to allow for an extra 113 billion pounds of investment over five years, while remaining committed to ensuring debt falls as a proportion of national income within five years. In the UK government's latest spending plan unveiled last week, she started to allocate the extra capital to areas including defence, housing, transport infrastructure and a new nuclear power plant. Even so, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility, an independent fiscal watchdog, UK capital spending will climb to a peak of 3.9% of GDP in 2027/2028 but then fall back in the following two years, continuing a limp public investment record stretching back to the global financial crisis. Reeves is searching for other growth levers, including deregulation and increased UK investment by British pension funds. Additionally, the government is seeking to streamline planning laws and taking steps – albeit small ones – to rebuild trade relations with the European Union. But the government is fundamentally hamstrung by its fiscal rules. Departments are currently required to go cap in hand to the finance ministry to learn what they can spend and then undergo frequent check-ins to see if the fiscal position has deteriorated, which could lead to spending cuts or tax rises. This is not a system that will produce a viable long-term growth strategy. The International Monetary Fund – not known for being a fan of unfettered state spending – said last month that the UK should consider taking a more pragmatic approach to avoid having to change policy too often. The IMF suggested minor breaches should not require instant corrective action and that assessment of the rules should be done no more than once a year. But something more radical is likely required for Britain to break out of the low growth, low productivity loop it has been trapped in for almost two decades. Over this period, debt as a proportion of GDP has almost tripled while the national tax take has held steady, suggesting that part of the problem might be with the way the finance ministry operates. The machinery of government needs recalibration to focus more systematically on productive investment that can ultimately help to drive debt down over time. Reeves is trying on this score. She has asked the OBR to assess the long-term impact of capital spending decisions to determine whether they could improve public finances. She is also changing the Treasury's "Green Book" rules that dictate approval of capital projects, shifting from a narrow cost-benefit analysis to an assessment of the impact on broader strategic goals such as lifting poorer regions of the UK. However, a fundamental issue remains. The Treasury still wields huge influence within the UK government, and when growth falls short, the impulse is typically to tighten the fiscal screws, thereby worsening growth prospects. The Institute for Government, a UK-based think tank, has argued that the economic heft of the prime minister's team needs strengthening as a counterbalance. EU nations – Germany, Spain and the Netherlands among others – have both a finance ministry and a separate, growth-focused economy ministry at the heart of government. Calls for a dramatic change in the Finance Ministry are growing. Maurice Glasman, who heads "Blue Labour", a campaign to reverse what it says is the Labour Party's abandonment of working-class communities, advocates abolishing the Treasury, scrapping fiscal rules and pursuing heavy infrastructure investment. While Glasman's prescription has little chance of being implemented in full, his ideas could gain influence within a government threatened by the rise of Nigel Farage's populist Reform UK party, which is targeting traditional Labour voters. Recent opinion polls have given Reform UK 27%-32% public support compared with 22%-24% for Labour. Ensuring public finances do not spiral out of control is, of course, critical for any government. And less oversight by the Treasury could result in wasted taxpayer money spent on unproductive investments that appeal to the political base. Moreover, the bond market has not reacted well to perceived UK fiscal imprudence in recent years, as demonstrated by the rapid demise of Liz Truss's premiership of 2022. But bond investors are apt to respond more positively to a long-term, investment-led approach to reducing public borrowing, even if it involves some upfront spending. It helps that the UK currently faces less political uncertainty than some of its peers and is in the middle of the pack in terms of developed market debt burdens. Reeves appears to understand that an investment-led structural reset is required to jump-start the UK growth engine. But to make that a reality, the first change may need to be rethinking the relationship between the Treasury and the prime minister's office. The opinions expressed here are those of Mike Peacock, the former head of communications at the Bank of England and a former senior editor at Reuters. Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), opens new tab, opens new tab, your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI, opens new tab, opens new tab can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab, opens new tab and X., opens new tab

Telegraph

34 minutes ago

• Telegraph

This is why Reform is on the cusp of victory

New polling by Ipsos-Mori has Reform on 34 points, currently heading for a working majority in Parliament at the next election. If this came to pass, it would mark the most extraordinary result in British politics in at least a century. Can we really trust polls like these? Let us consider reasons to be sceptical. The first is that all polls like this – standard, nationally representative surveys of a few thousand voters – only capture national vote share. They do not project the corresponding outcome of seats. While we can make rudimentary assumptions of a party's likely representation in Parliament, they are still assumptions. A 34 per cent vote share would return a huge number of seats, but we cannot know whether the spread of votes would be broad enough to secure the number of seats implied by this poll. A party might receive 34 per cent of the vote share, but their support might be concentrated in small geographical areas. In such circumstances, Britain's 'first-past-the-post' electoral system would limit them to a small number of seats. We know Reform will get little support in the big cities; this will artificially inflate Labour's seats next time and limit Reform's. The second reason to be sceptical of these polls is that, this far out from an election, they cannot be treated seriously as predictions. Polls are merely snapshots of public opinion at an exact moment in time. Things were different three months ago; they will be different in three months from now. Sometimes, with polls like this, there is a third reason to be sceptical: you get 'rogue' polls which put one party in an unusually high or low position. Sometimes polls randomly tap into a sample which is out-of-line with public opinion for some reason. This is why you must consider the average of all polls of a given period, and also consider whether polls reflect trends. In considering this specific point, let us now flip the analysis back over. Let us consider why this poll should be taken seriously: there are several reasons to do so. You cannot credibly write this poll off as 'rogue'. This result of 34 per cent broadly reflects other polls coming out at the moment. While it is a little higher, it is not much higher, and it confirms a clear trend that Reform is on the march. It obviously also reflects recent election results. At the mix of national and local elections in May, Reform secured a new MP, a new Mayor and a raft of new councillors across the country. They received 31 per cent of the vote share in the local elections. Ipsos-Mori's poll merely puts Reform on a slightly higher vote share than they secured several weeks ago in real elections. You must always take polls seriously if they reflect what is coming out in focus groups at the same time. Ed Shackle, Public First's head of qualitative research, confirms this to be the case. All the current momentum is with Reform. He notes that, while you used to get some hesitation from voters about admitting they were considering a Reform vote, this is gone now. People increasingly sense that Reform is surging, and it is exciting to get on the bandwagon. While Reform is surging in less-affluent areas on the coast and in towns and small cities across provincial England, their support is up across the board in the focus groups. They are currently hoovering-up most of the votes of disaffected people across the country. This recent polling result has also come after a wave of stories on issues where Reform is strong: immigration and crime, most notably. For the last few weeks, the media has been awash with stories of grooming gangs, serious crimes alleged to have been committed by asylum-seekers, the continued arrival of small boats, and all the rest. This cannot but help Reform's standing in the polls. While I am personally sceptical of anyone's ability to make a judgement on the national mood based on their own personal, random conversations, when these conversations are entirely in line with the polls, you have to wonder. And the conversations I have with ordinary people in my own personal life confirms that huge numbers of people are seriously thinking about voting for Reform. Overall, then, we should take this poll seriously; Reform is very obviously the most popular party in the country at this moment. But we still have four more years before the next election and an awful lot will change. Above all, given their recent record, it is reasonable to assume Reform will blow themselves up with internal rows and blatant incompetence. If they can make it through to the end of this year in a similar polling position but without a terrible internal trauma, it will be worth taking them very seriously.