Dr Peter Prinsley
MP for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket · Labour · United Kingdom
“I am confused by the Opposition referring in their new clause to a requirement to “make regulations” in this respect, as the private sector is already widely used to reduce waiting lists where appropriate. However, we must also be aware of the problem we have with overuse of private facilities.”
“I wonder whether the hon. Member’s experience mirrors mine. Many years ago, it seemed to be easy for general practitioners to ring me up. I often received telephone calls from general practitioners asking for advice about patients.”
“I am listening carefully to what the hon. Member, who is a medical colleague of mine, has to say. Although I think that a fracture liaison service is an excellent idea, there are many, many aspects of medical care that require careful attention, such as the management of people with hearing loss—my own field—or the assessment of people wi…”
“I agree with everything that the Minister has to say—what a surprise—but particularly the fact that when the new Government came in, they did something about these 40 “new” hospitals that were not full hospitals.”
“I am interested in what the hon. Member has to say about strike action. I was involved in trying to get the resident doctors’ strike stopped, but was unsuccessful for many months. I think she is talking about the principle of whether people involved in medical care should ever go on strike.”
“Does the Minister agree that the single most effective thing that we have done for public health since we were elected is to get the Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026 passed? The gradual abolition of cigarette smoking will save more lives than anything else we could conceivably do in politics.”
The complete record
Every one of 496 lines we hold for Dr Peter Prinsley, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 10.
“I thank the hon. Member for his speech. I would like to know whether he is aware of any evidence that mass screening of young people with ECGs will actually improve matters.”
“I agree with everything that the Minister has to say—what a surprise—but particularly the fact that when the new Government came in, they did something about these 40 “new” hospitals that were not full hospitals. The people of Bury St Edmunds were delighted to learn that their RAAC-affected hospital, which is tumbling down, will be one of the first to be reconstructed. We look forward to that and are grateful for the decisions made by the Government.”
“I am confused by the Opposition referring in their new clause to a requirement to “make regulations” in this respect, as the private sector is already widely used to reduce waiting lists where appropriate. However, we must also be aware of the problem we have with overuse of private facilities. That can have an effect on the provision of NHS services, because the number of available staff is limited. I think particularly of ophthalmology services, as we have created a situation in which the overprovision of private services has disabled the provision of ophthalmology services.”
“I am listening carefully to what the hon. Member, who is a medical colleague of mine, has to say. Although I think that a fracture liaison service is an excellent idea, there are many, many aspects of medical care that require careful attention, such as the management of people with hearing loss—my own field—or the assessment of people with chronic renal failure. Does the shadow Minister believe that all aspects of each individual disease category require some sort of primary legislation?”
“Does the Minister agree that the single most effective thing that we have done for public health since we were elected is to get the Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026 passed? The gradual abolition of cigarette smoking will save more lives than anything else we could conceivably do in politics.”
“Does the Minister agree that managers in the NHS sometimes get a very bad press from the medical profession? I believe that to be wholly unjustified.”
“Does the hon. Member agree that the invention of vaccination by Jenner centuries ago is the single most important medical invention we have had in this country?”
“I am interested in what the hon. Member has to say about strike action. I was involved in trying to get the resident doctors’ strike stopped, but was unsuccessful for many months. I think she is talking about the principle of whether people involved in medical care should ever go on strike. If she were to apply the proposed measure to medical practitioners, would she introduce the same rule for nurses?”
“This is, obviously, a very interesting discussion. I agree—I actually do—that medical practitioners should not go on strike, but the question is whether that should be the law. I would apply the same question to nurses, a point that the hon. Lady has not answered.”
“I wonder whether the hon. Member’s experience mirrors mine. Many years ago, it seemed to be easy for general practitioners to ring me up. I often received telephone calls from general practitioners asking for advice about patients. As time went on, general practitioners became busier and busier and seemed to have less time to telephone consultants. When I started my consultant career, I spoke often to general practitioners, and by the time I got elected to Parliament and had to stop, I found that was a very unusual thing. Has her experience been similar?”
“The other important fact is that more and more hospital referrals were not coming from general practitioners at all, but from other people working in the general practice such as nurses and physician associates, who are less confident in forming a clinical judgment.”
“T6. On Friday I met members of Barnham parish council in my constituency and the headteacher of the adjacent primary school, Amy. They raised concerns about the proposed accommodation of large numbers of asylum seekers at RAF Barnham. They worry about community cohesion, particularly if large numbers of young men are to be transported into neighbouring towns and villages without access to supervised constructive activity. Will the Minister outline what material steps will be taken to address this problem?”
“The Home Secretary’s reforms can combine control with sanctuary, but to achieve that, we must trust our communities and listen to them.”
“That does not make these people uncaring. Their concern is about how this is being done. They deserve to be properly consulted. Named community sponsorship and asylum accommodation are not the same. One offers refugees a safe and legal route, while the other houses people as their asylum claims are decided. The question is simple: do we begin with a site and ask the community to accept it, or do we begin with a community and ask what it is willing to do to help? The second is a much better starting point. For sponsorship to work, communities need training, clear guidance and continuing support. The people of Suffolk do not need lessons in compassion—they have opened their homes—but they must be heard when they raise concerns about RAF Barnham.”
“I want to speak about something very simple: the difference between being put somewhere and being welcomed somewhere. When Russia invaded Ukraine, we welcomed Ukrainians into our home, as many here have done. The questions were practical: “Where is the nearest doctor?”, “How does the bus work?”. That is why I welcome the Home Secretary’s commitment to named community sponsorship. The Government retain control over who enters and in what numbers, and the welcome will come from the community. Canada has a similar system, and we have seen that sponsorship works from Homes for Ukraine. More than 400 Ukrainians were welcomed into west Suffolk; the people of Suffolk are keen to help—they have proved it. I met the parish council and the headteacher at Barnham primary school. They are concerned about the use being made of the RAF Barnham base.”
“On the publication of data on avoidable deaths, new clause 84 states “where waits of more than 12 hours in accident and emergency departments was a contributory factor.” Does the right hon. Member consider it likely that there is any great accuracy in the assessment of whether a death was avoidable?”
“When I was a young doctor—a registrar—in the 1980s, we had 300,000 beds in our health service. By the time I was a senior doctor in the 2020s, we had 140,00 beds—less than half the number of beds we had before. When I was a young doctor, corridor care did not exist; I had never heard the term. The hospitals were simply big enough. Does the hon. Member agree that the many years of decline in the total number of beds in our hospitals is an extremely important factor in the fact that we do not have enough beds for the patients sitting in the A&E departments?”
“I wonder whether the hon. Member remembers that in 2010, when I believe there was an election— [ Interruption. ] Yes. The point I wish to make is that at the end of the previous Conservative Government, before Labour came back into office, waiting lists had reached an absolute record. Under the previous Labour Administration, waiting lists came down to almost nothing, but after 2010 they crept up and up, and by the time of the election in 2024 they had reached a record. I think she will recognise that Labour Governments have had strong records of reducing waiting lists, which is what we are doing now. We are only getting started, but it would be good to have some words of encouragement.”
“I think the principal reduction that the right hon. Member for Melton and Syston described was a result of the change of practice in the way that psychiatry was managed. During that period, we closed the asylums—large hospitals on the outskirts of almost every town and city. That was the result of a change in clinical practice—the idea that patients should be managed within the community. However, we continued to close acute beds, and it is the acute beds in the district general hospitals that are the problem we are talking about.”
“Although it is true that hospital management could concentrate on dealing with the waits in A&E, surely it needs to concentrate on the flow through the entire hospital. Every department and everybody involved in the hospital has to be thinking all the time about the flow through the entire hospital. That involves having a pharmacy that is open at night and ensuring that social workers are there when they need to be—it involves all manner of things. Simply concentrating on a particular statistic in an A&E department will not actually deal with the problem.”
“Would the hon. Member comment on what I consider to be almost the most successful and important Bill that our new Government have passed, on the effective abolition of cigarette smoking? As time goes by, that will save more lives than anything else we could possibly think of. I recognise that it was the initiative of the previous Government, but the fact that the new Government have managed to get it over the line is a massive achievement. That is very much underappreciated and certainly not spoken about anything like enough. We will never do anything as important as the abolition of cigarette smoking.”
“The doctors had been completely unable to get any of the authorities to deal with it, so one night—they were ex-military—they put a little dynamite in the drain and blew the whole thing up. That is well described in the book, and it just shows how public health was absolutely integrated into the foundational principles of the national health service.”
“Public health used to be clearly under the aegis of the national health service. Some years ago, public health officers became employees of the local authorities, and the thing became somewhat separated from the NHS. Does my hon. Friend agree that we must join public health more closely to the activities of the national health service? Public health was at the very foundations of the national health service. I do not know whether other Members have, like me, read A. J. Cronin’s famous book, “The Citadel”, which describes the health service’s origins; in fact, I understand it was the book that the original politicians had all read. It has a marvellous description of a typhus epidemic, caused by an infected drain running down the middle of a street in a little Welsh mining village.”
“I sit on the Home Affairs Committee, and we have lately been discussing the matter of serious organised crime, and vape shops in particular. It turns out that many of the vape shops are in fact not really shops; they are places for laundering money. Specifically, they launder money in relation to drug businesses and the drug trade, which is another huge public health matter that I am sure the Minister will agree needs to be dealt with. We were informed that about 10% of this country’s adult population are using illicit drugs, and that for the most part those are being delivered via the post office. Does the Minister agree that that is a massive public health issue that will also need to be urgently addressed?”
“Much of the conversation around those trade deals relates to pharmaceuticals from the United States. Our patients should be able to access the best available treatments, whatever deals we cook up. We must support innovative research based in our own country, particularly clinical trials for new medicines. To do that, we need to support clinical academics—the doctors who work in universities and organise research. Does the hon. Gentleman acknowledge that the number of clinical academics fell under the previous Conservative Administration? Most clinical academics are now very senior, and we are not recruiting replacements effectively. We need to look after our home-grown pharmaceutical industry so that we do not need such trade deals.”
“Will the Minister acknowledge that the uplift in the carer’s earnings allowance is a very significant measure that this Government did introduce?”
“Since I have been an MP, I have visited a number of schools in my constituency, and I have always been struck by the number of children who are carers. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] I think that is a very under-recognised group of people, whose lives are completely dominated by the fact that they are carers for their parents.”
“Time and again when I visit schools, they say, “Let’s get educational psychology support back into schools.” I think that is something my wife would support.”
“My wife is an educational psychologist, so I have lived this, in a vicarious fashion, for the last 30 years or more. I understand how the system for special educational needs has evolved, particularly the role of the psychological services and how children are supported. As a result of a series of reforms, in particular during the years of austerity, the services provided by local authorities to schools—particularly the schools’ psychological services—became much more focused on psychologists providing reports to inform the distribution of resources, and much less focused on educational psychologists actually being in schools supporting children. I would like to see a change, such that educational psychologists and their expertise are back in schools, in classrooms, supporting teachers.”
“West Suffolk hospital simply refused to accept that corridor care was inevitable. I believe that we should take the best of those ideas to the rest of the NHS.”
“Almost 80% of clinical leads also said that patients were being harmed by corridor care. My son is an A&E doctor, who is presently in London. He texted me shortly after I was elected: “Dad, bring the Health Secretary here right now so that he can see what is going on.” There were queues of trollies and patients waiting in ambulances, and trollies in the car park. We know that many patients come to serious harm while waiting. As my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud said, A&E means accident and emergency; that is what it is for. At West Suffolk hospital in my constituency, Dr Cameron, the chief executive, said that corridor care had been “sorted out” through a whole-hospital approach, with everyone thinking about patient flow, planning discharge early and involving social services, allied health professionals and pharmacy.”
“The diagnosis of a urinary tract infection would have been made, the patient would have been given an antibiotic and somebody would have come to see them in the morning, and they would have been a lot better by then and would never have been admitted. We can definitely reduce admissions if we think more carefully about how we treat patients in the community. “Corridor care” is an oxymoron. There should be no corridor care. As we have heard, it happens when patients arriving in A&E overwhelm the available cubicles and rooms and the wards have no beds, and we know that patients are sent to A&E because the GP system simply cannot cope. I understand that the APPG on emergency care found that 20% of major emergency departments had patients being cared for on trolleys or in chairs in corridors.”
“Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) said, if an elderly woman goes off her legs at five o’clock on a Friday evening in February, the family will call the GP. The answerphone will say “Dial 111”, the call handler will triage her and advise ringing 999, and that woman will arrive at A&E at 9 o’clock in the evening, be seen at 1 in the morning and be admitted, because that is what happens if someone is seen at 1 in the morning. If we had a functioning community health service, with more neighbourhood health services, the patient would probably have been visited by a GP, perhaps until 10 o’clock at night.”
“It is true: I am another doctor. I qualified in 1982, probably long before my distinguished colleague, my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Dr Allin-Khan), was even born. I thank her very much for securing this important debate. For context, when I was a registrar in 1988, the NHS had 300,000 beds, but by the time I was a senior consultant in 2020, we had 140,000 beds—less than half the beds we had when I was a registrar. I recall how the Northern general hospital in Sheffield had rows of Nightingale wards with crisp, white linen stretching as far as the eye could see down to the end of the ward. There were always beds. There was no such thing as corridor care. To echo what the distinguished GP, my hon.”
“What we are talking about is not so much the safety of staff when they come forward, but the safety of patients, and whether we genuinely believe that the proposed modification to the arrangement will improve patient safety. That is the underlying point. Although the safety of staff is important, it is the safety of patients that we must bear in mind.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. The question is what will make patients more safe. Does incorporating the department that looks at safety into the organisation that inspects the services help? It might. Safety is not an add-on; safety must be at the heart of absolutely everything that we do. Safety is not a separate matter; it depends on those who work in our NHS and all of us all the time. That must be the culture. Let us not rely so much on inspections and litigations. At a time when we are unable to find jobs for newly qualified midwives, we spend more on obstetric litigation and compensation than we spend on obstetrics. I applaud what our Government are trying to do and their intention to improve things.”
“I listened carefully to what the Minister said about a change of culture. A change of culture can certainly happen. In the surgical world, we used to bring patients into the operating theatre, check that the patient was on the operating table and do the operation. Sometimes, we operated on the wrong patient and on the wrong part of the body. We then introduced the World Health Organisation checklist, which checked absolutely everything before we started. It was a complete change of culture in the operating department. We made sure that we had the right prosthesis, the right patient and that we were operating on the right part of the patient. Now, the WHO checklist is a universally adopted process. I am absolutely sure that the culture in the health service can change.”
“The theme is also that which we spoke about this morning on whether an organisation can successfully interrogate itself. I believe that with the appropriate safeguards it probably could, but I do think that the suggestion that there ought to be a formal report on the impact within 12 months is something worth considering.”
“I rise to speak to new clause 74 on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (John Slinger), who is in the Gallery, and also to some extent on behalf of my predecessor, Jo Churchill, who was the Member of Parliament for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket before me, and was also a Health Minister. This is about Healthwatch and the patient voice. The amendment tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby suggests that the Secretary of State create an impact report within 12 months of the Bill passing through Parliament to assess what the impact of the amalgamation or integration of the functions of Healthwatch into the ICB would in fact be, and in particular look at the effectiveness of the complaints procedure and the way in which complaints were responded to.”
“I am grateful to the hon. Member for taking my intervention and I am sorry that it is late in the afternoon. The question we are faced with is this: what is the best system to serve our patients? If the best system turns out to be a system that is procured from another country, would he in principle always object to that?”
“In 1914 we were producing 12 Vickers machine guns a week; by 1918, we were producing 1,200. Warfighting depends not only on the bravery of our armed forces, but on the technical innovation of our manufacturers. In Suffolk we now have advanced drone manufacturers. Does the Minister agree that we must always be ready for the next war?”
“I am very interested in the increase in the number of people waiting for mental health care, particularly mental health assessments. Does the hon. Member think that that is because the funding is inadequate, or is there some other reason why the waiting list numbers have been shooting up?”
“We are talking about investing in mental health services, and we should consider more widely the causes of the mental health disorders that we are having to approach. If we are spending public money, we may be better off spending it on dealing with the causes of mental health problems rather than the consequences.”
“First, may I thank the Minister most sincerely for his statement? His is not an easy task. Eileen and Catherine from Bury St Edmunds lobbied me here in Parliament yesterday, for they feel very deeply about the plight of the Palestinians, as do we all. They asked me what we in this House could do to influence the Government of Israel. I believe that we must support progressive voices in Israel, for this is an election year. Does the Minister agree with me?”
“I am aware of the role of governors in some of our NHS trusts and the way in which they are appointed, but governors have said to me that they are sometimes disappointed by the level of influence they can in fact have in their trust. Can the hon. Member think of examples of where governors have particularly influenced the activities of individual trusts? I have not found that to be the case in my experience.”
“I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South West Norfolk (Terry Jermy) for mentioning RAF Barnham, which is in my constituency—it is adjacent to the border of Thetford, and within easy walking distance of it. It was formerly a base that housed mustard gas during the first world war, and in the cold war it was the home of the RAF’s strategic nuclear weapons, so it has an interesting history. The people of Suffolk are a kind and compassionate people, and they understand the need to house those who are fleeing war and persecution. However, I saw a protest at RAF Barnham this weekend, so how will the views of local people be taken into account, and what exactly is the role of the local planning authority?”
“I have received representations from rural dispensing practices in my constituency about the provision of vaccination services. I understand that dispensing general practitioners are having difficulty securing the funding to provide vaccinations, particularly the new meningitis vaccination for young people. Does the Minister envisage that the change being proposed will have any effect on that arrangement?”
“Sometimes, when a patient comes into hospital for an operation on their tonsils and I ask them, “When did you last have an attack of tonsilitis?” they say, “I can’t remember.” We have to take account of the fact that the condition of the patient may fluctuate.”
“I am not entirely clear why there is a problem with the financial incentive. People coming off lists that they have been on for a long, long time may well have a clinical condition that is changing. In my practice, I deal with the management of children with glue ear, who need to have grommets. From time to time, the condition fluctuates and the glue ear goes away. Equally, the reason that we do a tonsillectomy is that people get recurrent acute tonsilitis, but it is actually quite a good idea for people to wait some time because often the recurrent acute tonsilitis simply settles down and they do not need their operation.”
“I am interested to hear what the Minister has to say, but does she agree that this is yet another reason why we must go full speed ahead to get the single patient record sorted out?”