Stephen Kinnock
MP for Aberafan Maesteg · Labour · United Kingdom
“I thank the shadow Secretary of State for her kind words and look forward to our exchanges across the Dispatch Box. I am ready to engage with her on getting the maximum benefits for the people of Wales.”
“I thank the right hon. Lady and look forward to working with her. My understanding is that there were challenges around the helicopter capability. Decisions were taken by Natural Resources Wales some time ago to change the way that the tendering for helicopter capability works. We certainly need to look at that.”
“I thank my right hon. Friend for his question. Like him, I pay tribute to all those involved in the collective and heroic response to the wildfires.”
“I thank the right hon. Lady for her question. Many of the ideas coming forward for devolving power right across our United Kingdom, beyond Cardiff Bay and Holyrood, are very exciting, and I look forward to exploring them with her.”
“Just to be clear, this is not about staying out of the issue; it is about respecting the devolution settlement, but being prepared to work constructively where we can in partnership with the Welsh Government. The hon.”
“I know about and welcome the right hon. Gentleman’s strong connections to Wales. I recognise the connectivity benefits that WSMR’s proposal could deliver, particularly for passengers in Wales and the west midlands.”
The complete record
Every one of 5,341 lines we hold for Stephen Kinnock, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 107.
“The phase 1 diagnostic report was published last year and made 11 recommendations centred on four key priorities: more flexible training; removing the divide between service and training; ending the damaging recruitment bottlenecks and rewarding teams where doctors feel valued. The implementation team, led by Dame Jane Dacre, who has been appointed as the independent chair for this work, will now work with doctors, the General Medical Council, the Medical Schools Council, royal colleges and other bodies to drive this much-needed change.”
“It supports newly qualified doctors to develop the clinical and professional skills needed to deliver safe and effective care, preparing them for progression into core, specialty or general practice training. Resident doctors who currently work in the NHS have made it clear that they have concerns and frustrations with their training experience. We are committed to listening to and addressing that and to improving the training pathway for the medical workforce, for the benefit of NHS services and patients. Through phase 1 of the medical training review we conducted extensive engagement to ensure that doctors, patients and NHS leaders had the opportunity to describe what works well in medical education and training and what needs to improve to meet the needs of both resident doctors and patients.”
“It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I congratulate and thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley) for securing this vital debate, and all the hon. Members who have contributed. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s significant and distinguished career and experience in our NHS. I take the opportunity to thank resident doctors up and down the country for the vital contribution they make to our NHS and to treating the patients it serves. As my hon. Friend said in his opening speech, the UK foundation programme is a central part of the pathway to becoming a doctor, bridging the gap between medical school and specialty or general practice training in the NHS.”
“Applicants are allocated across the UK using a nationally applied preference informed allocation system, which has been extensively commented on in the debate. The PIA system was introduced in 2024, following extensive engagement with the four UK statutory education bodies, medical students and key stakeholders. The move to the new system aimed to address concerns that the previous system was unfair and stressful for applicants and that there was a lack of standardisation within and across schools. It is worth mentioning that the consultation on the PIA system received over 14,500 responses, 66% of which favoured a move to the PIA option against the status quo. There were 106 organisations among those 14,500 responses. It was an extensive consultation with fairly conclusive feedback on the change that was required.”
“Of course, our fast-track legislation seeks to rectify the unforgivably reckless and damaging decision made by the previous Government to remove the resident labour market test after Brexit, which in many ways is the root cause of the mess created by the neglect and incompetence of the previous Government over 14 years. I turn now to the process for allocating places to applicants for the UK foundation programme and the steps the Government are taking to improve it. We recognise that the location a foundation doctor is assigned for training has both professional and personal impacts. The four UK Health Departments determine the number of places available each year based on workforce planning across the continuum of postgraduate medical education and training.”
“The workforce plan will be published this spring, so there is not too long to wait. It has taken a little longer than we initially hoped, but we think it is really important to ensure that it is anchored in very solid engagement with our partners and stakeholders. Earlier this year, the Government delivered fast-track legislation to put UK medical graduates at the front of the queue for foundation and specialty training places, reducing uncertainty and ensuring that they can progress to full registration as doctors. We have confirmed that all eligible UK medical graduates will be offered a place on the foundation programme this year.”
“That includes measures such as the less-than-full-time training options to allow trainees to continue to work in the service and progress with their training on a reduced working pattern where that is beneficial for their personal circumstances. We have made significant progress over the past year to improve the working lives of resident doctors, including agreeing an improved exception reporting system, which will ensure that doctors are compensated fairly for additional work, and rationalising statutory and mandatory training to reduce unnecessary burden and repetition.”
“To tackle that, NHS England is developing pilots under the medical education and training review to test longer placements and more flexible arrangements for less-than-full-time trainees. The evaluation of those pilots will inform future policy decisions on placement length and continuity benefits. I turn now to the wider working conditions for resident doctors. It is essential that we create a supportive environment for doctors throughout their training that looks after their health and wellbeing. NHS England’s resident doctors’ working lives programme continues to implement several measures aimed at supporting resident doctors, encouraging them to stay in training and the NHS and reducing overall attrition.”
“We are clear that the system in place is enabling people to clearly articulate their first preference, and in the overwhelming majority of cases they are getting their first preference. That does not feel like a random system to us, but we absolutely accept that it is not perfect, and there is always room for improvement. Let me turn to rotations. We recognise the importance of stability for doctors in training and the impact that frequent relocations can have on wellbeing, retention and workforce planning. Following the 2024 resident doctors agreement, the Department of Health and Social Care conducted a review of rotational training and found that rotations can provide valuable breadth of experience. However, we know that in some cases they can disrupt learning, wellbeing, team integration and patient care.”
“In the last two years, we have supported a portion of students in three UK medical schools by allocating them to foundation programmes in their local area. Last Friday we went further, announcing that we will work with medical schools and foundation schools to extend that support to trainees across the country from disadvantaged backgrounds. Providing a post close to where they live will mean more stability for trainees and will support employers in developing a local workforce. I would like to say a final word on the PIA. I think we all accept that it is not perfect—it is very difficult to have a perfect system—but I take issue with the characterisation by some Members in the debate that it is a random system. We do not agree with that characterisation.”
“The introduction of the PIA was broadly supported by stakeholders, and I am pleased that we have seen an improvement under this system in the number of students allocated their first preference programme. As I said, 82% of applicants to this year’s foundation programme were allocated their first preference, up from 71% in 2023. However, we are committed to ensuring that the system remains fit for purpose. NHS England will conduct a review to ensure that it is still working for applicants. The timelines of that review will be confirmed in due course. Furthermore, although some individuals may want to move away from their university area for foundation training, some need greater certainty, for a range of reasons, about their foundation placements.”
“It is worth highlighting that around 82% of applicants get their first preference. That is a significant improvement—it was 71% in 2023. We are taking steps in the right direction, but we would love to get to 100%. It is difficult to get to 100% of anything in a large and complex system, but that is our aspiration. Of course, those who do not get their first place are welcome to re-engage with the system, and efforts are made to ensure they get their preference, although we do not always succeed in that process. I will take the hon. Member’s question away and discuss it with my colleague the Minister of State for Health—she leads on this portfolio, although she was not available for this debate—and we will write to him with further clarifications on the important point he makes.”
“Yes, that is the Government’s intention. Obviously, we have had some challenges in April around our hope that we could create 1,000 additional places. We have not been able to do that, unfortunately, because of the reckless decision of the BMA to go back out on strike. The absorption of huge capacity, as well as operational issues, has meant that we have not been able to do that. [ Official Report, 27 April 2026; Vol. 784, c. 3WC.] (Correction)”
“Sorry; I misunderstood the question. Yes, it is still our intention to double the number of medical school places. [ Official Report, 27 April 2026; Vol. 784, c. 3WC.] (Correction) The Government remain committed to publishing a 10-year workforce plan this spring to set out how we will create a workforce ready to deliver the transformed service that we set out in the 10-year health plan. The 10-year workforce plan will ensure that the NHS has the right people, in the right places, with the right skills to care for patients when they need it. NHS staff told us through the 10-year health plan engagement that they are crying out for change. The workforce plan will set out how we deliver that change by making sure staff are better treated and have better training, more fulfilling roles and hope for the future. I thank all hon.”
“The Secretary of State believed that he had a deal with the officers of the BMA, and those officers then took that deal to the broader committee. There is no doubt that that committee has ideological motivations, and it refused to accept the deal. We are now in a very challenging position. The Secretary of State has asked several times for a face-to-face meeting with the entire committee, and that request has been refused. We have to make progress, but I simply remind its members that most of our constituents would see a 29% pay increase as a pretty positive deal.”
“That gives me an opportunity to highlight the fact that this Government have delivered a 29% pay increase for resident doctors. Although I absolutely accept that, prior to July 2024, over 14 years of dealing with an incompetent Government, they suffered from being underpaid and neglected, and we had to seek to fix that—we have done that in good faith and with good will—there have to be limits to what we can offer. The sky is not the limit; the limit is the deeply damaged and parlous state of the public finances that were left to us when we took over in July 2024, and the significant pressures across every aspect of Government. We implore the resident doctors and the BMA to come back to the table.”
“The short answer is yes, absolutely—our door is always open. We have to find a constructive way through this. I accept that it is not always just about pay; it is also about broader terms and conditions—exactly the things we have been debating today. That is why I was so excited by the fast-track legislation we brought forward specifically to address the bottlenecks and the impact of the disgraceful decision under the previous Government to remove the resident labour market test. We are seeking to fix all those problems, and we need a constructive partner on the other side of the table to do that. We are starting to see in opinion polls that public support for the action taken by the BMA and resident doctors is eroding quite seriously, and I hope they take that into account before they make their next decisions.”
“We see the right to organise and go on strike as a fundamental right of citizens in our country, and it would be a retrograde step to remove it. It is pretty extraordinary to hear that suggested by the Conservative party when we live in a liberal democracy. So the answer to the hon. Lady’s question is no. I believe we will find a way through this dispute. It will be hard going—it will be two steps forward and one step back, I am sure—but in the end I believe we will get there.”
“The hon. Lady’s point about morality is important and interesting, but people also have to be able to put bread on the table, pay the mortgage or rent, and feed and clothe their kids. Morality is fine, but it does not put bread on the table. The two things are very important. On the retrograde steps the Conservative party is proposing around industrial relations, that is just not what the Labour party is about. The Labour party is about constructive, positive industrial relations and respect. It is about treating the workforce and unions with the respect they deserve and finding a constructive solution. We do not want to move to some kind of police state, where we restrict the rights of trade unions.”
“The Government are taking important steps, and we remain committed to improving the working lives and prospects of resident doctors, and to ensuring an effective foundation programme.”
“We have those restrictions on the right to strike in the police and the armed forces for obvious reasons of national security. I think that is a very different issue; our critical national infrastructure must be protected, and there cannot be any dispute about that. We are dealing with a workforce whose pay and conditions had clearly been neglected. The previous Government used the moral argument the hon. Lady was trying to make as leverage to keep pay and conditions down, which I would say is a deeply immoral position to take. The right to be a member of a trade union and to go on strike is relevant to certain sectors of our labour market, and that right, where it exists, should be protected; where it does not exist, that is a completely different debate. I thank all Members for taking part in this important debate.”
“Since July 2024, we have been rebuilding a broken NHS dentistry system. We have delivered 1.8 million more treatments and reduced the underspend from £392 million to just £36 million, maximising the treatment provided for taxpayers’ money. Last year, we asked integrated care boards to commission additional urgent appointments, and the data will be published in August. Following advice from the chief dental officer, we broadened the scope of those appointments so that more patients could benefit.”
“My hon. Friend is a strong campaigner for her constituents. The situation that she sets out is unacceptable, but change is under way. I am encouraged by the latest data for her ICB area, which shows a 79% success rate for those who tried to get an NHS dentist appointment in the past two years, and that 10% more treatments were delivered between April and October 2025, compared with the same period before the election. Our reforms from this April will go further, focusing on those with the most urgent and complex needs, to ensure that people can access care when they need it most.”
“I am encouraged by the fact that, in the hon. Gentleman’s Humber and North Yorkshire ICB area, 52,795 more NHS dental treatments were delivered between April and October 2025 compared with the same period before the election, so some progress is being made, but more must be achieved. Long-term contract reform will enable the resolution of some of the funding issues that he mentions—that is ongoing work—and we will come forward in the summer with a public consultation on delivering fundamental reform to the dentistry contract.”
“We will publish those data and statistics in August, in the usual way, but I can tell the hon. Lady that we have created a safety net for urgent dental care. Following the reforms that kicked in on 1 April this year, there is now a requirement for all NHS dentists to deliver 8.2% of their contract in urgent care. We absolutely recognise that more needs to be done in cases such as that of her constituent, and that is what we are focused on with fundamental dentistry contract reform.”
“I am equally pleased about what is happening with the University of East Anglia. When we came into office in July 2024, I was shocked to discover that there had been no sustained increase in the number of dental places in our country since 2007, and I am very proud of the fact that this Government have turned that around. With regard to the overseas registration examination, I had the General Dental Council in my office shortly after the general election to ask why the contract has been failing, and it is mainly due to the neglect and incompetence of the Conservative party. We have sorted that out. There is a new contractor in place, and we will be delivering thousands more out of the backlog of international dentists starting from 1 April this year.”
“We promised to improve GP access, and we are delivering. There are 2,000 more GPs than in July 2024—double our manifesto commitment of 1,000. The previous Government planned to increase GP numbers. Between 2019 and 2024, the number of fully qualified full-time equivalent GPs actually fell by 900. We have delivered 8 million more appointments, and we have seen satisfaction go up from 61%, where it was languishing in July 2024, to 74% today.”
“My hon. Friend is a doughty champion for his constituents. I can absolutely give him that assurance. The GP contract is clear that patients must have the option of telephoning or visiting their practice in person, and online tools must be an addition to, rather than a replacement for, other contact methods. However, we have found that by expanding online access, we have significantly reduced pressure on phone lines, and we are ending the 8 am scramble.”
“I am very pleased that we have our £102 million primary care utilisation and modernisation fund, the precise purpose of which is to develop more estate capacity in general practice, and of course we have our substantial commitment to neighbourhood health centres, with 120 to be delivered by the end of this Parliament and 250 by 2035. The hon. Member should certainly be talking to his ICB about its estate strategy. Now is the right time to intervene and ensure that the issue he raised is being addressed.”
“I am astonished that the Conservatives seem to be teaming up with the British Medical Association in opposition to our reforms. They ought to listen to their voters and their members, who are crying out for change. We are getting the NHS to do things differently because that is the only way we are going to turn it around. Advice and Guidance is seeing more investment in GPs and getting patients cared for in the right place at the right time.”
“I have honestly never heard so much nonsense in my entire life. We invested £80 million in Advice and Guidance. Some 1.1 million Advice and Guidance requests were diverted from the waiting list, so that care is being delivered in the right place. We have embedded A&G into the core contract, recognising it as routine practice, removing annual sign-ups and providing more predictable funding. The shadow Minister seems to be saying that patients who do not need to be treated in hospital should be treated in hospital. That runs completely counter to the entire strategy, which is about moving care from hospital into the community. The Conservative party needs to get with the programme.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for his question; he is a strong voice for palliative care and for Pembridge hospice in his constituency. Palliative care is vital in our communities, and I completely agree that ICBs, like West London, should engage with their local communities to ensure that they can meet their palliative care needs.”
“There is absolutely an issue with developers not delivering what they say they are going to deliver either through section 106 or through CIL. We are working closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to address this issue. I would be more than happy to hear more about the hon. Lady’s specific proposal. We want to work pragmatically and constructively to resolve this issue.”
“As I said to the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan), we are looking at the way that section 106 and CIL are used. I certainly look forward to working with councils across the country, but as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has said, when people go to the ballot box on 7 May, they should think very carefully about how much more effective it is when councils work in partnership with this Labour Government.”
“We are working closely with the BDA on long-term contract reform. It has to be about getting the balance right, so that dentists are incentivised to do NHS dentistry and we maximise access. A public consultation on fundamental contract reform is coming before the summer, and I am sure the hon. Member will want to take part in it.”
“I know that the local town and county council have been working in partnership with Dorset ICB over many years to support GP partnerships in the Chickerell area in developing a business case for NHS capital or revenue funding. I would be delighted to meet my hon. Friend, and to continue to make plans for applying pressure to ensure that this is delivered.”
“Every one of those individuals should receive an appropriate package of care that meets their assessed health and care needs. Our statutory guidance is designed to support integrated care boards to provide the most appropriate care for every eligible individual, ensuring that they are placed at the centre of the assessment and care planning process. NHS England oversees integrated care boards in delivering their functions and undertakes regular and ongoing assurance work, including commissioning work, to promote effective implementation of NHS continuing healthcare. I know that integrated care boards across the country are working hard to streamline administrative processes and find efficiencies so that more people can access the care they need sooner.”
“NHS continuing healthcare provides critical support to some individuals with the highest needs, offering a fully funded package of health and social care to meet their needs. This supports our 10-year health plan ambition by helping individuals to live more independently outside hospital and to be closer to home and to loved ones. The last Labour Government introduced NHS continuing healthcare, which, despite the challenges set out today, is supporting thousands of people across the country with their care needs. We also set out our statutory guidance, the first national framework to ensure a consistent approach. In the year ending March 2025, over 164,000 people across England were found to be eligible for NHS continuing healthcare—an increase from the 160,000 eligible individuals in 2017.”
“It is of course great news that significant medical advances have led to increases in the average life expectancy in the UK both for the general population and for those with significant health challenges, but we need to recognise that that has placed additional pressure on our health and care system, and there is no doubt that it can create challenges in accessing the right care and support in the right place at the right time. We value the opportunity to hear about personal experiences from everyone who is here today, so that we can continue to improve services for the people who need them most. A key ambition of the Government’s 10-year health plan is to support people to live independent and dignified lives in their communities.”
“It is truly a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris—for now, anyway. I thank the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) for securing this important debate, and I express my gratitude to other Members who have contributed to it. By working together, we can improve the lives of people living with some of the highest needs. I also want to acknowledge and thank families, loved ones and other unpaid carers, and of course the health and social care staff who provide committed and compassionate care every day. Every one of us has constituents living with highly complex needs that arise from a wide variety of illnesses, disabilities or accidents.”
“We want to support integrated care boards in delivering national policy and guidance, including on how we can achieve better join-up between the NHS and local authorities. I congratulate the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr again on securing this important debate—and I thank all those who intervened in it—so that we can continue to focus on improving services for the people who need them most. I know that this is a very challenging and emotive topic for many families who are going through extremely difficult times, and I absolutely accept that sometimes controversial decisions are made. We need to ensure that in every one of those controversial cases there is transparency, clarity and coherence. I look forward to working with the hon. Gentleman and with Members across the House to ensure that, collectively, we achieve that goal.”
“I also know that concerns have been raised about the relatively low number of individuals who are ultimately found eligible for NHS continuing healthcare after they have been referred for full assessment. The threshold for initial referral by GPs, social workers and others is deliberately set low to ensure that anyone who may be eligible is fully assessed. For that reason, many individuals will not go on to receive NHS continuing healthcare. However, an assessment is also a gateway to other forms of NHS-funded support, such as NHS-funded nursing care and joint packages of care between local authorities and integrated care boards. My Department and NHS England continue to work with partners, including the CHC Alliance, Dementia UK, the Nuffield Trust and other sector bodies.”
“Where it has not been possible to resolve the matter locally, an individual may apply to NHS England for an independent review panel to review the decision. Finally, if the original decision is upheld and there is still a challenge, the individual can make a complaint to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. I was very sorry to hear from the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr of the difficulties that his constituents are experiencing, and I thank him for sharing the details of Daniel’s case. I would of course be happy to receive further representations from the hon. Member. Perhaps he could start by setting out in a letter what the issues are, and then we can make sure that appropriate action is taken.”
“My Department is also engaging with local areas to explore current work on eligibility disputes, and how they address those challenges. There are no quick fixes, but we remain committed to supporting the sector to improve outcomes for individuals. I want to stress that while disputes between organisations are being resolved, individuals must never be left without the appropriate care and support. There is a robust dispute resolution process in place for when a full assessment for NHS continuing healthcare has been undertaken and the person or people concerned disagree with the outcome. First, an individual or their representative can ask for a local review from the relevant integrated care board. All integrated care boards should have developed a local resolution process that is fair, transparent and includes timescales.”
“I want all individuals who are eligible for NHS continuing healthcare to receive support in a timely manner, and I want the assessment process to be as smooth, clear and transparent as it possibly can be. We know that eligibility rates can vary from year to year, and across regions and integrated care boards. That variation often exists for good reasons, including differences or changes in the health needs of local populations or individuals over time. To check that the variation is warranted and justified, NHS England continues to monitor eligibility rates by undertaking detailed work to compare eligibility and referral rates between integrated care boards. When it identifies unwarranted variation between integrated care boards with similar demographics, it follows up and seeks to ensure coherence and consistency.”
“However, I acknowledge that, in practice, it is not always straightforward to determine clearly who is responsible for meeting an individual’s needs, so we are working with NHS England to better join up support between the NHS and local authorities, exploring areas where good joint working is helping to improve outcomes for people accessing NHS continuing healthcare. Through the development of our neighbourhood health services, local authorities and integrated care boards are encouraged to consider how services can be reconfigured to focus more on prevention and early intervention, embedding new ways of working to set the direction of travel for future years.”
“I acknowledge existing tensions between integrated care boards and local authorities regarding NHS continuing healthcare eligibility decisions. Those decisions hinge on whether the support required by an individual is above the limits of what the local authority can provide. Integrated care boards must consult with the relevant local authority before making any decision about an individual’s eligibility for NHS continuing healthcare, putting individuals at the heart of the decision-making process.”
“Members may have seen her speech at the Nuffield Trust summit on 5 March. I thank her for setting out recommendations for immediate action on adult social care, which focused on three key areas: safeguarding, dementia and motor neurone disease. We will not waste time in taking those recommendations forward. We look forward to reviewing Baroness Casey’s phase 1 report, which is due later this year and will set out further recommendations to address immediate priorities for adult social care in this Parliament, laying the groundwork for long-term reform and setting us on the path to delivering a national care service. In her recent speech, Baroness Casey rightly raised challenges with NHS continuing healthcare. We are carefully considering her reflections.”
“In the interim, teams are increasingly working together closely under an interim joint leadership team, including on NHS continuing healthcare. Fundamentally, addressing some of the issues that hon. Members have discussed today will require wider reform of the social care system. That is why Baroness Casey is chairing an independent commission into adult social care. The commission has a clear mandate to undertake the most comprehensive review of adult social care in a generation. With Baroness Casey as its chair, it will cut through the political stalemate, identify what the country needs and wants from adult social care, and support the Government in establishing a system that works. Baroness Casey has made it clear that she will not wait until the end of the commission to recommend action where she sees fit to do so. Hon.”
“Legal duties in relation to NHS continuing healthcare must continue to be met. This means that running-cost reductions should aim to make administrative and corporate functions more efficient. They are not there to change funding for direct care or statutory duties. I acknowledge that integrated care boards have worked intensively to strengthen their plans for 2025-26, focusing on areas where efficiencies and savings can be made. I thank NHS England for working with integrated care boards to monitor spend against these plans. The Department is working closely with NHS England on how responsibilities will be delivered from April 2027 onwards, when—subject to the will of Parliament—NHS England will be abolished. Until those changes are made, the Department and NHS England will continue to carry out their respective statutory functions.”