Bobby Dean
MP for Carshalton and Wallington · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“A study that came out this week said that of the 2,500 articles about extreme weather over the last few weeks, 72%—the vast majority—made no mention at all of climate change. That is despite the fact that scientists tell us that the link between the two is indisputable.”
“I join the Leader of the House in his comments about Ann Widdecombe. She was a conviction politician and she was respected for that. I join Mr Speaker, and I am sure Madam Deputy Speaker as well, in thanking the staff for all their service over the course of the term.”
“I understand that usually, if the Government want to make a statement relating to foreign affairs, we get a statement from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, so I hope it will not be a habit of the House to change the whole business to Back-Bench debates, rather than giving us a formal statement from Government Ministers.”
“T6. I listened to the Minister’s answers earlier on the dentistry contract, and he said that the Government need time to get it right and that a consultation will be launched soon. My local dentists are desperate to take on NHS patients. This has been a known issue for a number of years.”
“More broadly, the country will be wondering why, although we have effectively known for weeks who the new Prime Minister will be, it will be months before he faces any parliamentary scrutiny on his plans. Will the Leader of the House explain how this situation has been allowed to happen?”
“The Office for Budget Responsibility fiscal report, out today, highlights some of the long-term risks of climate damage to the UK’s finances. Unlike other OBR reports at formal fiscal events, there are no implications for the Government; they do not have to make any adjustments to their current financial planning.”
The complete record
Every one of 409 lines we hold for Bobby Dean, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 9.
“Will the Leader of the House organise for the relevant Minister to come to this place and explain the link between extreme heat and climate change, and lay out what the Government are set to do to mitigate the effects?”
“A study that came out this week said that of the 2,500 articles about extreme weather over the last few weeks, 72%—the vast majority—made no mention at all of climate change. That is despite the fact that scientists tell us that the link between the two is indisputable. The idea that this is a freak, one-off event is, frankly, for the birds, and the Met Office has confirmed this week that “the climate of the 20th century has now gone.” The number of days at over 30° in London has quadrupled and the warm weather is even moving further north. The impact is pretty serious, and we have seen it on our schools, our hospitals, our workplaces and public transport, which have all ground to a halt at times. More seriously, 2,700 deaths in May and June have been linked to heat-related causes.”
“I join the Leader of the House in his comments about Ann Widdecombe. She was a conviction politician and she was respected for that. I join Mr Speaker, and I am sure Madam Deputy Speaker as well, in thanking the staff for all their service over the course of the term. I had hoped to start by triumphantly demanding the confirmation of a bank holiday, but I will have to change tack slightly and desperately plea with the Government to give us a day off anyway so that we can get over the trauma of last night. More importantly, I raise something that I do not think our nation talks about enough, which is the weather and, more specifically, the relationship between the weather and climate change.”
“T6. I listened to the Minister’s answers earlier on the dentistry contract, and he said that the Government need time to get it right and that a consultation will be launched soon. My local dentists are desperate to take on NHS patients. This has been a known issue for a number of years. Is it not wholly unacceptable that the Government do not yet have a proposed solution, let alone are implementing one?”
“More broadly, the country will be wondering why, although we have effectively known for weeks who the new Prime Minister will be, it will be months before he faces any parliamentary scrutiny on his plans. Will the Leader of the House explain how this situation has been allowed to happen? Does he agree that our constituents deserve answers about the new Prime Minister’s plans much sooner?”
“I understand that usually, if the Government want to make a statement relating to foreign affairs, we get a statement from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, so I hope it will not be a habit of the House to change the whole business to Back-Bench debates, rather than giving us a formal statement from Government Ministers. While we are on the subject of Opposition days, it would be remiss of me not to highlight that the Leader of the Opposition recently said: “The fact is we are the smallest opposition party in history—we don’t have enough MPs.” I suggest to the Leader of the House that if the Government want to allocate more Opposition day debates to the Liberal Democrats, we will gladly take them. [ Interruption. ] The Opposition have come out in force today—well done on coming out today.”
“The Office for Budget Responsibility fiscal report, out today, highlights some of the long-term risks of climate damage to the UK’s finances. Unlike other OBR reports at formal fiscal events, there are no implications for the Government; they do not have to make any adjustments to their current financial planning. If he were to be moved to the Treasury, would the Secretary of State consider changing the fiscal rules to encourage more long-term planning for things like climate change?”
“I am pleased to hear the Government accept that part of the issue here is successive Governments’ obsession with outsourcing by default. I ask the Minister for some reassurance that, when assessing the merits of insourcing this particular contract, they will not do so in isolation, but will also take into account the wider benefits of building state capacity so that the Government are able to execute their core functions with confidence.”
“We warned the Government about this, and when we did we were told that they could not fund public services without the rises in business taxes, but let me make it clear to them: the Government will no longer receive any tax income from this local business anymore, and I fear that the revenue loss will continue to grow over the course of this year. Will the Government organise a statement from the relevant Department explaining what they are going to do about small businesses in distress, outlining how many are at risk and how many have already closed since April?”
“I join the whole House in congratulating the England team, in particular Tottenham Hotspur academy product Harry Kane for his heroics last night. I am also grateful to the Conservatives for their lecture on sanctimony, though I note that self-awareness was never their strongest trait. This week my community was rocked by the news that Coughlan’s Bakery—a family-run business that been operating in the local area for 89 years—will close its doors for the last time. In their announcement, they say: “This was so devastating as March was a fantastic month, as was a lot of last year with our growth with new stores opening, but as soon as April’s new Government rules kicked in on national insurance, wages and rates, it instantly hit the high street”. That shows that Government policy is directly killing long-term, family-run businesses.”
“To deliver on this review’s recommendations in full will require serious capital investment. Just last week, we heard that St Helier, the hospital in my constituency, was considering closing its maternity unit altogether due to potentially unsafe pipework. Will the Government commit to reviewing the phasing of the new hospital programme, or at the very least providing the funds required to keep those buildings safe and open until the delivery of a new building?”
“Will the Leader of the House confirm when that report will be published? We were told last August that there would a rapid investigation, so I hope it will be published this side of the summer recess.”
“Shockingly, at the moment, those who go through a miscarriage experience are not offered support—they have to wait until their third miscarriage to get support. Tommy’s is campaigning for access to graduated support from day one. I note that the hon. Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous) has written a cross-party letter to the Government about this, which I support. We received information about maternity services in Nottingham yesterday, but we still await the final report on the national maternity and neonatal investigation, led by Baroness Amos. She gave interim findings earlier this year, from which we discovered that lots of women feel as if they are not listened to, that there is a postcode lottery for services and that many women are being treated in inadequate buildings.”
“I join the Leader of the House in his comments about Venezuela, Edinburgh, Bedford and our armed forces. I acknowledge his comments about the summer of saving, but ask him: a summer of saving who? Paternity leave has been a joy. I know it will not make me popular with new parents, but mercifully my daughter has been sleeping pretty well, so far— [ Interruption. ] Mum is doing well too. As hon. Members may know, our journey to this point has not been straightforward. I shared our story of miscarriage in the baby loss debate last year. Telling that story was the start of hearing from thousands of women across the country about their experiences, which was truly humbling. It connected me with organisations such as Tommy’s, which is proposing a new model for graded levels of care for miscarriage.”
“For far too long, we have had an economic strategy that is naive about what happens in a free market if there is a hegemonic power in it. That power has to be challenged. Members have touched on this today, but the answer lies in a greater focus on tech sovereignty. It is not about gaining tech independence; we are not suddenly going to invent our own Facebook, ChatGPT or Amazon tomorrow—it would be naive of us to try—but about establishing our own niches within the global markets so that we claw some of that power back. It is about pooling our sovereignty and working with like-minded states, perhaps those in the EU, and collectively using our power to enforce tax, regulations and other legal limits on the activities of tech companies.”
“Yes, we want frictionless free trade, but is a market really free if it has been captured by a handful of firms? I thought that traditional economic theory already warned us about that, but we seem to have become more naive about it in the last decade or so. Looking at the power analysis in the global market, this is really about the hegemonic role of the US. If we look at pension funds, for example, more of UK pension savings now go into Apple than into all UK firms combined. We can see how the problem accelerates over time. We wonder why our brilliant tech start-ups are not able to grow; it is because when they reach the point when they need more capital, all the capital is in the US. We get Google buying out DeepMind and the cycle continues. They get bigger and bigger, and we get weaker and weaker.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy. I thank the right hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) for securing the debate and for his thoughtful contribution. He not only highlighted the dangers of content and addiction but made a power analysis when he talked about the threat to democracy of big tech companies. They have a supranational status now, and states are struggling to tax or regulate them—or to enforce the regulations that they have against them. That is a real challenge to democracy that we need to face up to across the House. At the heart of this is the fact that tech companies have simply been allowed to get too big. We have had a laissez-faire attitude towards their growth over the years, which is based on confused economic principles.”
“The right hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point. That is another item on the list of things that we have ignored for far too long. Ultimately, we need to shift the balance of power. As he said in his speech, the power has been shifted too far in favour of a handful of tech giants. This is not just about economic power; it is about our national security, the delivery of public services and, ultimately, our independence in the world and our ability to shape our destiny. I thank him for raising this important issue, and I hope we can have more discussions about power, as well as the impact of that power.”
“Because they are not protected by the Ofgem price cap, those customers will be extremely worried about what the latest events mean for them, so will the Leader of the House organise for the relevant Minister to come to the House to reassure those customers about what support will be put in place for them in the forthcoming energy crisis?”
“She addressed the particular problem facing heating oil customers and has offered some reassurances that there will be broader targeted support in the weeks to come, but may I bring the House’s attention to another group who have not yet been spoken about: district heat network customers? Community-based district heat networks are often tied to a single supplier. Customers often live in blocks of flats, usually in cities, and at the moment they are not covered by the Ofgem price cap. Having been a district heat network customer myself, I know that customers are sometimes protected from global supply shocks, but that depends on the network, where the heat comes from and the contracts that the supplier has signed up to.”
“Mr Speaker, I echo your tribute to the late David Winnick. I join Members from all parts of the House in condemning the attack in north London—this House stands united against antisemitism. I am grateful for the Government’s swift commitment to replace the ambulances, which was an important gesture. I welcome the confirmation of the date for the King’s Speech. As the Leader of the House knows, I will not be present as my first baby is due in a few weeks’ time so I will be on leave, but I hope it all goes well— [ Interruption. ] Well, as well as it can. On Iran, it is clear that Trump’s reckless war is causing death and destruction in the region, and that it is having repercussions for everybody across the world. I welcome the fact that the Chancellor has made a couple of statements on this issue already.”
“Have the Government committed not only to reimbursing or returning the money that the families are due, but compensating them fully to reflect the distress that has been caused? He has already mentioned interest; will he confirm that all that interest will be returned? Will legal costs also be reimbursed? Some of the bereaved families resorted to legal action to get what they believed they were owed, and I am sure that they will feel that they are entitled to be reimbursed on that as well. Will the Government now carry out a full independent investigation to fully learn the lessons of what happened and ensure that there will be much stronger oversight of the system going forward?”
“I thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement and for the action he has outlined that the Government are already undertaking. He will know that customers often choose National Savings & Investments because it is Government-backed, and because that provides them with extra reassurance that their savings will be safe. The news that the money of tens of thousands of people was essentially lost for a period of time will be a hammer blow to trust in that institution, and the fact that these cases involve bereaved families makes it particularly damaging. To restore trust in the institution, it will be vital that justice is served comprehensively and swiftly. Will the Minister confirm the estimated timeline for identifying and contacting every family affected?”
“I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and the action he is taking on cryptocurrency, but can I urge him to go further on corporate donations? A report this week by CenTax revealed that as many as one in four donations from corporate entities are essentially opaque. It put this down to the reliance on persons with significant control rules, and it made a series of recommendations. Will he commit to looking at the recommendations in that report and ensuring that we tighten up the system so that people cannot simply circumvent the rules by donating via British companies?”
“Will the Leader of the House organise for a statement to be made about how we will tackle the rise in misinformation and conspiracy theories and, ultimately, get the rate of childhood vaccination up again?”
“Some of that has been attributed to misinformation that is allowed to spread freely online, but there are also well-organised and well-funded anti-vaccination groups, which I am sure we have all come across. Unfortunately, that has been egged on at times by populist politicians. President Trump in America has appointed a vaccine sceptic into a senior role in the White House and the Reform party platformed an anti-vax spokesperson at its conference recently. All of us who have dared to confront this subject will have got stick online. I have even had protesters stop me on the high street while walking my dog to give me stick about the subject. I think that has made us a little bit scared as a political class to take this subject on, and it is about time that we used moments like this to take on the conspiracy theorists.”
“I am sure that you, Mr Speaker, will be as concerned as I am about the recent outbreak of meningitis in Kent, and I am sure the thoughts of the whole House are with the families who have lost loved ones already. The UK Health Security Agency has a huge job on its hands to get good public health information out there and to work with the NHS on a targeted vaccination programme. It is a reminder of how much faith and trust we put in health professionals in these moments of crisis. They are all dedicated to keeping us safe. This situation is also a reminder of the dangers of bad information. It is a sad truth that in this country, the take-up rates of child vaccination have declined over the past decade.”
“Also, I raised this matter with the Leader of the House in October last year, and I still have not received a reply from the Minister.”
“The Prime Minister himself said that big tech companies need to be held financially accountable for their role in fraud, but when the strategy was released, it did not enforce that commitment; instead, an industry working group emerged, which will talk to the industry and ask them nicely to act. The banks and financial regulators are unhappy about this—of course, the banks are on the hook for paying out compensation to customers when they are victims of fraud. They say that when they try to get big tech companies to act, those companies are far too slow and not responsive, and the only thing that will make them act is if they are also hit in the pocket when fraud takes place. Can the Leader of the House organise for a Minister to come to the Dispatch Box and explain why that commitment was dropped?”
“I bring to the House this week a matter that I have raised with the Leader of the House before: fraud. As he knows, fraud is a devastating crime that can destroy people’s life savings and plunge them into debt, and it is now the most frequently experienced crime in Britain. On Monday, the Government released their fraud strategy, but anybody would be forgiven for not noticing, because no Minister came to the Dispatch Box to speak about it, and there was hardly any media coverage. Given how prevalent this crime is, we have to ask ourselves why no noise was made about this significant strategy. I think the reason is that a key pre-election commitment on fraud was quietly dropped.”
“That is why business confidence is at an all-time low, growth is flatlining and we now have almost a million young unemployed. Given that youth unemployment was not addressed in the spring statement, will the Leader of the House organise for a Treasury Minister to come to the House and make a statement on youth employment so that we can hold this Government to account?”
“Businesses are citing the living wage, national insurance and business rates all as reasons why it is more difficult to hire young people. The Government may want to defend each of those in exclusivity—I, for one, defend the rise in the living wage—but if we pile costs on businesses all at once, there comes a point when they baulk. We are lectured on these Benches sometimes for not supporting every Labour tax rise, as if it is the only way to get revenue for public services. Yet economics is not mere accounting. We cannot simply shift numbers from one column to another; every action has an effect. If businesses are raided for multiple taxes all at once and their response is to cut hours, cut jobs and possibly close altogether, that tax revenue does not come in.”
“I join you, Mr Speaker, in thanking Tom Goldsmith for his immense service. I also wish those celebrating this weekend a happy Holi. There are three events in my constituency this weekend, and I intend to get covered in colour. Moving on to the spring statement that we had this week, there were no policy announcements. That has left many young people feeling cut adrift. Youth unemployment is now almost a million. That is the highest rate that we have had in a decade and it is now higher than the EU average; it has become a specifically British problem that has accelerated under this Government. Why? It is not down to any one thing, but an accumulation, yet many of those things are under the Government’s control.”
“But however arduous the process, or however far beyond our electoral terms the output of capital investment may be, it is vital for the long-term healthcare of our constituents that we fight for these slow returners, too.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered NHS capital spending. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Western. I am grateful to have secured this debate on NHS capital spending. This subject goes right to the heart of how the NHS functions, and yet it is not discussed enough in this place. I had a look through some ministerial statements and questions in preparation for this debate, and I found that we often talk about staffing, specific illnesses, waiting times and other operational performance issues, but the simple truth is that all these challenges will be much more difficult to deal with until we improve NHS buildings, equipment and technical infrastructure. I get it: it feels much more impactful and immediate to talk about lifting nurses’ pay or commissioning a new medicine, and those things are important.”
“I note that that was prior to the pandemic, when operational pressures were clearly stress-tested to the limits, and I have no doubt that that under-investment left us more exposed than we otherwise would have been during that period. The outfall is staggering. If we had simply matched existing levels of capital spend, more than £30 billion of additional capital would have flowed into the NHS. Instead, we watched buildings decay, equipment age, diagnostics fall behind and maintenance backlogs soar.”
“I am grateful for the point my hon. Friend made, and I will come to make very similar points about the impact that maintenance backlogs are having. It is partly because of the slow payoff of capital investment that we are in this mess. The last Conservative Government completely undermined the NHS’s future by overpromising, underdelivering and sacrificing long-term investment to plug holes in their mismanagement of the public finances. While capital underspends being plundered for revenue black holes is not a total innovation, it did accelerate under the Conservatives, with the most acute period seeing more than £4 billion raided from the capital budget in the five years up to 2019 to cover deficits in day-to-day spending.”
“According to OECD data, the UK has 10 CT scanners per 1,000 people compared with an average of nearly 20 per 1,000 across Europe. We have 8.5 MRI scanners per 1,000, compared with an average of 12 per 1,000 across other EU nations, and our bed capacity is pitiful. We operate at around 2.4 per 1,000 people, compared with an OECD average of 4.4. The issue has not only been a lack of money; it has also been a lack of certainty and flexibility. The approvals process for capital bids is slow and cumbersome. Even when capital is available, trusts often receive final sign-off so late in the year that they physically cannot begin procurement, get survey work done and start construction in time. The money therefore goes unspent not because of poor planning locally, but because the system itself creates delay.”
“My hon. Friend makes an excellent point: this is about not just buildings, but equipment and digital and technical infrastructure, all of which are crucial to getting the NHS to operate in the way it should. She also highlights how we need to upgrade ageing equipment to a very basic level, let alone take advantage of all the opportunities that the latest innovations in new equipment could provide us with, if we were able to purchase those. I mentioned that maintenance backlogs are soaring. They have doubled from around £6 billion in 2015 to over £13 billion in 2024. The critical thing to stress is that it did not have to be this way. The UK invested around a third less in health capital during the 2010s than other comparable nations.”
“The result is a system where underspends exist at the same time as record levels of urgent capital need. Trusts want to invest and start work, but the system ties their hands. The effect of all that has not been abstract. The buildings maintenance backlog includes high-risk failures: operating theatres closed due to ventilation problems, leaks near electrical systems, sewerage failures and outdated wards where modern clinical standards simply cannot be delivered. A 2022 British Medical Association survey found that 43% of doctors reported that building conditions negatively impacted patient care.”
“The hon. Gentleman highlights the complexity in putting together large capital projects. Funding is not often from one source. It is from multiple sources, and everybody providing the capital needs to have greater flexibility for the schemes to become deliverable, or the funds end up getting clawed back and put elsewhere, as has been done in the past. The yearly cycle that I speak about is important because, in the past, capital departmental expenditure limits rules—Treasury CDEL rules—have meant that any unspent capital must be returned to the Treasury at the year end. Not being able to carry it forward punishes good financial management, prevents multi-year planning and leaves trusts scrambling to spend money before deadlines, rather than investing it strategically.”
“Despite tens of millions having been spent on basic repairs in recent years, the building is deteriorating faster than the trust can fix it. The new hospital programme promised to resolve many of those issues with a new building for emergency and maternity care but, with that delay well into the 2030s, my constituents are left facing another decade of care in a building that is visibly past its lifespan.”
“Hospitals such as mine will want to be at the front of the queue for any reallocation, if such an opportunity should arise. I have already mentioned my local hospital, but there is no clearer case of capital neglect than St Helier hospital in my constituency. It is as old as the NHS itself, overcrowded and cramped, and the specialist emergency care functions are simply not up to modern-day clinical standards. Let me be clear: staff at St Helier are working heroically and patients are safe, but they are in a building that is not designed for 21st-century emergency care, with patients routinely treated in corridors. Key recommendations for improving service delivery simply cannot be implemented because there is physically not enough space.”
“The programme was reset by this Government, with an updated timetable and revised waves of projects. My local hospital’s building was put into the second wave, meaning that work will not begin until the 2030s, which was a bitter disappointment. Since the announcement of delay, things have gone a little quiet overall. A year or so on from the announcement, people are wondering how the programme is getting on. There are rumours that are some in the first wave are not keeping pace and could already be underspending allocations. Mostly, that is put down to the adaptation period of the hospital 2.0 model, an attempt to homogenise design across the country that is broadly welcome. Any delays will spark questions about what will happen to that allocated spend.”
“The new delegated authority will cut out layers of bureaucracy and speed up delivery on the ground for ward refurbishments and equipment purchases. It will not address issues inherited in the largest NHS capital schemes, however, which brings me on to the new hospitals programme. The programme was imagined by former Prime Minister Boris Johnson—I say “imagined”, because for some time the only place it existed was in his imagination. Conservative leaflets in my patch were emblazoned with a promise that the money had been secured for a new hospital building that would be delivered by 2024. I am sure that experience holds true for many in this room. When 2024 came, hardly a brick had been laid across the country. When the new Government came in, they told us no money had ever been allocated for those schemes.”
“I do not think we should be churlish about that—an increase in investment is inarguably good—but equally, we should not kid ourselves that investment is now at the required level. It does not fully address the inadequacy of past investment, nor does it bring it in line with international comparators. The King’s Fund has described the failure to reverse the historical underfunding by the previous Conservative Government as “extremely disappointing”. The NHS Confederation is asking for the commitment over the spending period to be doubled in real terms, from £3.1 billion to £6.4 billion. There has also been greater flexibility, with Treasury approval now only required for capital projects in excess of £300 million, up from the previous, pitiful £50 million.”
“It is worth saying that the Government’s stated intention has been a step in the right direction. There has been more certainty, more money and more flexibility. After the initial one-year capital settlement for 2025-26, with assurances that things would continue, the spending review confirmed capital budgets through to 2029-30. Those decisions will provide some stability, though it is still uncertain whether the Treasury clawback system remains in place on an annual basis or over the spending review period. There was a substantial uplift of money in the year 1 allocations, but that is followed by a relatively flat commitment going forward, albeit at a higher level due to the initial uplift.”
“I recently met an AI developer who thinks they have come up with a solution to the elective surgery booking system. His system auto-calls patients and offers them a choice of appointment, making hundreds of calls in just minutes. They say it beats the old system on two counts. Patients usually receive a date by post without a choice, but the trial in the midlands saw “did not attend” numbers drop by 50%, which they put down to patient choice in the appointment time, and delivery was guaranteed because they had answered the phone. Think of the potential productivity gains if such technology was picked up at scale. I have explained a little about the past state of NHS capital spending and will now turn to where the Government are today. Part of the reason for this debate is to find out where the Government think they are.”
“Obviously that is a fantastic sign of good capital investment, but when I spoke to the trust I was shocked to discover it is one of the only hospitals in the country with that particular piece of kit, and I thought to myself how much more productive the NHS would be if such equipment was rolled out routinely across the country as soon as it became available. Then there is the infamy of poor IT systems. More than 13.5 million clinical working hours are lost every year due to poor IT. We have all heard shocking stories of hospitals running on Windows operating systems that we were talking to a paperclip on 20 years ago. As the age of artificial intelligence promises to transform the workplace, it would be great if the NHS could catch up with the last decade or so.”
“I do agree with my hon. Friend. I will come on to the new hospitals programme, as my constituency stands to benefit from it, too—if it comes soon enough. In the meantime, as she says, we are paying twice to pay for the repairs and patchwork, and never keeping up with the investment we need. Ageing diagnostic equipment also means fewer scans, longer waits and more delayed diagnosis. Last year I had the pleasure of visiting my local hospital’s nuclear medicine unit, where I was shown a new machine that was driving down diagnosis times from hours to minutes.”