:00:00. > :00:00.to see what ever my department can do to work across and help all
:00:00. > :00:00.regions of the United Kingdom including Northern Ireland.
:00:07. > :00:16.Thank you. Order. Wilbur member wishing to take his seat please come
:00:17. > :00:29.to the table. -- would the member wishing to take his seat.
:00:30. > :00:36.I, Gareth Craig is now do solemnly sincerely and truly declare and
:00:37. > :00:40.affirm I will be faithful and paid for allegiance to Her Majesty Queen
:00:41. > :01:16.Elizabeth, her heirs and successors, according to law. -- Gareth Snell.
:01:17. > :01:34.Gareth Snell, member for Stoke-on-Trent Central.
:01:35. > :01:44.Order. Urgent question, Jonathan Ashworth. Thank you Mr Speaker. To
:01:45. > :01:48.ask the Secretary of State to make a statement on the loss of
:01:49. > :01:54.confidential NHS correspondence by NHS shared business services.
:01:55. > :01:59.The Secretary of State for Health, secretary Jeremy Hunt.
:02:00. > :02:03.Thank you Mr Speaker. On the 24th of March last year I was informed of
:02:04. > :02:08.the serious incident involving a large backlog of unprocessed NHS
:02:09. > :02:13.patient correspondence, by the company contracted to deliver it to
:02:14. > :02:19.GP surgeries, NHS shared business services. The backlog arose from the
:02:20. > :02:26.primary care services GP mailed redirection service that SBS was
:02:27. > :02:30.contracted to do in 2016. However, in three areas of England, the East
:02:31. > :02:35.Midlands, north-east London and the south-west England, this did not
:02:36. > :02:39.happen, affecting 708,000 items of correspondence. None of the
:02:40. > :02:45.documents were lost, and all were kept in secure storage but my
:02:46. > :02:50.immediate concern was patient safety might have been compromised by the
:02:51. > :02:54.delay in forwarding correspondence. This is a rapid process was started,
:02:55. > :02:59.to identify whether anyone had been put at risk. The Department of
:03:00. > :03:04.Health and NHS England immediately established an incident team led by
:03:05. > :03:08.Mr Matthews, who heads the NHS single primary care services team.
:03:09. > :03:13.All the documentation has been sent on to the relative relevant GP
:03:14. > :03:16.services, where it is possible to do so, following initial clinical
:03:17. > :03:21.assessment of where any patient risk my life.
:03:22. > :03:25.200,000 pieces were temporary residence forms and a further
:03:26. > :03:32.500,000 pieces were assessed as low risk. A first for a large identified
:03:33. > :03:37.2500 items that had potential risk of harm and needed further
:03:38. > :03:41.investigation, but followed up by local GPs has already identified
:03:42. > :03:46.nearly 2000 of these as having no patient harm. The remainder are
:03:47. > :03:51.still being assessed, but so far no patient harm has been identified.
:03:52. > :03:55.As well as patient safety, transparency both for the public and
:03:56. > :04:02.this house has been my priority. I was advised by officials not to make
:04:03. > :04:07.the issue public last March, until an assessment of the risks to
:04:08. > :04:12.patient safety had been completed, and all relevant GP surgeries
:04:13. > :04:16.informed. I accepted that advice for the very simple reason that
:04:17. > :04:20.publicising the issue could have meant GP surgeries being inundated
:04:21. > :04:25.with enquiries from worried patients, which would have prevented
:04:26. > :04:29.them doing the most important work, namely investigating the named
:04:30. > :04:33.patients who word is potentially at risk. For the same reasons and in
:04:34. > :04:38.good faith, a proactive statement about what had happened was again
:04:39. > :04:43.not recommended by my department in July. However, on balance, I decided
:04:44. > :04:47.it was important for the House to know what had happened before we
:04:48. > :04:50.broke for recess, so I did not follow that advice and placed a
:04:51. > :04:55.written statement before the House on the 21st of July.
:04:56. > :04:59.Since then the PAC has been kept regularly informed. Most recently
:05:00. > :05:02.been updated by my permanent secretary only last Friday. The
:05:03. > :05:06.information Commissioner was updated in August and the National Audit
:05:07. > :05:11.Office is currently monitoring the response. I committed in July 2016
:05:12. > :05:14.to keeping the House updated once the investigations are complete and
:05:15. > :05:20.more was known and will continue to do so.
:05:21. > :05:25.Let's be under no illusions Mr Speaker, this is a catastrophic
:05:26. > :05:33.breach of data protection. Over half a million patients data, including
:05:34. > :05:37.blood test results, cancer screening results, biopsy results, even
:05:38. > :05:41.correspondence relating to cases of child protection all undelivered.
:05:42. > :05:46.They were languishing in a warehouse on the Secretary of State's watch.
:05:47. > :05:51.It's an absolute scandal, Mr Speaker. Time and time again this
:05:52. > :05:56.Health Secretary promises us transparency. Well, today he stands
:05:57. > :06:02.accused of a cover up. The Department of Health knew about this
:06:03. > :06:04.in March, 2016, so why did it take this self-proclaimed champion of
:06:05. > :06:13.transparency until the last day before the House rose last summer to
:06:14. > :06:18.issue 138 words statement in Parliament? That's statement said
:06:19. > :06:21."Just some correspondence had not reached the intended recipients"
:06:22. > :06:25.Foster when he made that statement was he therefore aware that it
:06:26. > :06:30.amounted to over 700,000 letters? If so, why did he not inform
:06:31. > :06:34.Parliament? If he didn't know, does that not call into question his
:06:35. > :06:39.competence? Now, what guarantees can he give us
:06:40. > :06:43.that no further warehouses of letters are yet to be discovered?
:06:44. > :06:47.Was the private contractor involved paid for the delivery of these
:06:48. > :06:52.letters and if so, what steps are being taken to recover the money?
:06:53. > :06:57.How many patients were harmed because their GP did not receive
:06:58. > :07:03.information about their ongoing treatment? Do patients remain at
:07:04. > :07:06.risk? Is talked about the ongoing investigation into 2500 by NHS
:07:07. > :07:12.England. When are we likely to know the outcome of that investigation?
:07:13. > :07:17.We understand capita now has the contractor delivering these
:07:18. > :07:21.services. What he putting Capita under so it doesn't happen again and
:07:22. > :07:26.is it not better that rather than this relentless pursuit of
:07:27. > :07:30.privatisation that we bring services back in-house? Mr Speaker, two
:07:31. > :07:37.months into 2017 and the health service lurches from one crisis to
:07:38. > :07:40.another. Hospitals overcrowded, waiting lists out of control. He
:07:41. > :07:45.can't deliver the investment our NHS needs. He can't deliver a social
:07:46. > :07:51.care solution. He can't deliver patient safety and now he can't even
:07:52. > :07:56.deliver the post, Mr Speaker! He has overseen a shambles that puts
:07:57. > :07:57.patient safety at risk. Patients deserve answers and they deserve an
:07:58. > :08:09.apology. The right honourable gentleman is
:08:10. > :08:15.reasonable and sensible but these commendable sides to his character
:08:16. > :08:18.have not read on display, not least because I answered a number of the
:08:19. > :08:25.questions in his preprepared questions. He said there had been a
:08:26. > :08:31.catastrophic breach of data protection. Nope patient data was
:08:32. > :08:40.lost and all data was kept in secure settings. I know it's a great
:08:41. > :08:45.temptation to go on about privatisation but what happened
:08:46. > :08:52.since SBS lost this account was that this work was taken in-house. It is
:08:53. > :08:58.not being done by Capita at by the NHS, so much for his relentless
:08:59. > :09:05.pursuit of the private sector that he thinks we are pursuing. This
:09:06. > :09:10.morning he told the Guardian that patient safety will have been put
:09:11. > :09:19.seriously at risk. Patient safety, as he knows, is our primary concern
:09:20. > :09:23.but as things stand, he will have heard there is no evidence so far
:09:24. > :09:32.that any patient safety has been put at risk. We have been through over
:09:33. > :09:39.700,000 documents and so far we can find no evidence but there are 2500
:09:40. > :09:44.we are doing a second check with GPs so that a second clinical opinion is
:09:45. > :09:49.sought and of those so far, nearly 2000 cases, we do not think there is
:09:50. > :09:56.evidence and are going through the remaining ones, but it was totally
:09:57. > :10:01.incompetent for SBS to allow this and we take full responsibility as a
:10:02. > :10:07.government because we were responsible at that time but the
:10:08. > :10:12.measure of the competence of the Government isn't when suppliers make
:10:13. > :10:17.mistakes, it happened a few times when Labour were running the NHS,
:10:18. > :10:24.the measure is what you do to sort out the problem and immediately we
:10:25. > :10:31.set up an instant team, every piece of correspondence has been assessed,
:10:32. > :10:36.around 80% of the higher risk cases have been assessed by a second
:10:37. > :10:42.clinician, and then he suggested the Government had tried to hide the
:10:43. > :10:46.matter. If he listened, I did not follow my advice from officials
:10:47. > :10:53.which was not to publicise the matter, I decided that the House
:10:54. > :10:59.needed to know and it was only a week after I was reappointed to this
:11:00. > :11:03.job but I didn't just lay a written statement, I also referred to which
:11:04. > :11:09.in my department's annual report and he said I had played down the
:11:10. > :11:17.severity of what happened. The report said the serious incident was
:11:18. > :11:19.identified and talked about a large backlog of unprocessed
:11:20. > :11:26.correspondence relating to patients. It couldn't have been clearer. For
:11:27. > :11:31.this Government has always been about patient safety, we have
:11:32. > :11:36.listened, as I know he would have done if we were in office, to the
:11:37. > :11:42.advice of people who said if we went public right of way, GP surgeries
:11:43. > :11:46.could be prevented from making detailed assessments of a small
:11:47. > :11:53.number of at risk cases and that was quite report, but as soon as we
:11:54. > :11:57.judged it possible, we informed this House and the public and stayed true
:11:58. > :12:06.to our commitment to patient safety and transparency. This is
:12:07. > :12:11.undoubtedly a serious incident but I welcome the detailed and thorough
:12:12. > :12:16.steps the Secretary of State has taken to protect patient safety. He
:12:17. > :12:21.will know there are ongoing problems with the transfer of patient records
:12:22. > :12:28.and GPs and hospitals spend hours chasing up results and letters on a
:12:29. > :12:31.daily basis. Isn't it time that patients were given direct control
:12:32. > :12:37.of their own records and will he update the House on this? I would
:12:38. > :12:42.like to thank my honourable friend for her contribution and she is
:12:43. > :12:47.right that although the process of sending on these documents has been
:12:48. > :12:56.taken in-house, other parts of the contract were taken on by Capita
:12:57. > :13:03.and... No. He cannot stop, campy? Left me rip eight that this work has
:13:04. > :13:09.been taken in-house but other work by Capita has had teething problems
:13:10. > :13:14.which we are aware of and we know it has caused doubles for GPs, and the
:13:15. > :13:21.minister has been meeting Capita and people relating to that contract of
:13:22. > :13:26.a fortnightly basis. In the long run the issue is to give patients
:13:27. > :13:31.control of their records. We have become the first country in the
:13:32. > :13:35.world to give every patient access to their records online and from
:13:36. > :13:42.September you will be able to do that without having to do to your
:13:43. > :13:50.GP. I'm sure everyone across the House is glad that this 750,000
:13:51. > :13:54.incidents have not so far resulted in patients suffering but that is
:13:55. > :14:01.like rather than plan for which we should be grateful. This is yet
:14:02. > :14:07.another situation similar to concentric 's and others we have
:14:08. > :14:11.seen, so when we are outsourcing and taking on these companies, what is
:14:12. > :14:17.the basis and governments of the contract? The Secretary of State
:14:18. > :14:23.mentioned other incidences of transferring data when a patient
:14:24. > :14:28.moves surgery, so when will data in England become more digital so
:14:29. > :14:35.things are not sent by the post-? We haven't used that for several years
:14:36. > :14:38.in Scotland and it is holding back the primary care system here, so
:14:39. > :14:45.when will his vision for that come about? She's good at selling their
:14:46. > :14:49.house things that Scotland does better than the NHS in England but
:14:50. > :14:55.is more coy about things that Scotland does less well than
:14:56. > :15:02.England, and if you put aside those issues, we can both agree that the
:15:03. > :15:09.sooner the NHS across the whole UK goes electronic the better. We have
:15:10. > :15:13.made progress so far, more than two thirds of A departments can access
:15:14. > :15:20.a summary of GP records and we go further every month. As these
:15:21. > :15:26.patients could have moved anywhere in the country, can my right
:15:27. > :15:32.honourable friend assure me whether any of my gift achievements in Bury
:15:33. > :15:39.North would be affected, either today or in the future? I don't have
:15:40. > :15:44.the information about Bury North patients immediately to hand but I
:15:45. > :15:51.will write and tell him if it has affected any of his constituents. I
:15:52. > :15:57.raised my concerns about the contracting out of patient records
:15:58. > :16:02.service to SBS in 2011 and was told by his predecessor that this was
:16:03. > :16:09.about saving money, so can he tell us how much money has been saved and
:16:10. > :16:16.how many of the 708,000 patients affected are in the South West? The
:16:17. > :16:20.south-west was one of the regions affected and I can write to him with
:16:21. > :16:26.exactly how many patients I think were affected, but it was when his
:16:27. > :16:30.government was in office and when he was a Health Minister that the use
:16:31. > :16:36.of the private sector was championed. I know it's not
:16:37. > :16:44.fashionable in his party now but we think if we want the NHS to be the
:16:45. > :16:48.safest in the world... Water. The honourable gentleman is shouting
:16:49. > :16:53.from a sedentary position. I cannot imagine it is the offence I would
:16:54. > :17:00.have committed. I do not know what has happened to standards. Objection
:17:01. > :17:05.to the manner and content of a ministerial response is not a novel
:17:06. > :17:13.phenomenon in the House of Commons. Victoria Atkins. There have been
:17:14. > :17:21.cries opposite of privatisation but isn't the truth that in 2007 HMRC
:17:22. > :17:30.lost the entire collection of child benefit records affecting 25 million
:17:31. > :17:36.people and isn't the point that old data holders, whether in the private
:17:37. > :17:43.or public sector, must hold our private information securely? That
:17:44. > :17:50.is absolutely the point and what people will wonder was, when we were
:17:51. > :17:56.faced with this issue, which was a serious issue, did we react as
:17:57. > :17:59.quickly as we could to keep patients safe, and I believe the answer is
:18:00. > :18:06.yes, and did that happen under the last laboured government? The
:18:07. > :18:12.Secretary of State just stated with great authority that no patient data
:18:13. > :18:17.was lost. I would be interested to know how he can be so certain, given
:18:18. > :18:23.all this data was missing for a long time without anyone noticing. What
:18:24. > :18:29.controls are in place now that were not in place then that meant he can
:18:30. > :18:35.make that statement? I don't know if she has done a health question with
:18:36. > :18:41.me before but we are assured that the data was not lost, it was kept
:18:42. > :18:48.in secure setting which means it was safe, it wasn't breached or accessed
:18:49. > :18:53.by anyone else. What didn't happen but should have happened is that it
:18:54. > :18:58.wasn't passed on to the right GP surgery, which is why we have taken
:18:59. > :19:05.steps to make sure patients are kept safe. My honourable friend miracle
:19:06. > :19:10.times when we found ourselves in opposition and hope we had found a
:19:11. > :19:16.success on our hands and the image that springs to mind is foxes and
:19:17. > :19:22.shooting them. Will he agree with me that the department he expertly
:19:23. > :19:28.guides need to draw attention to the use of electronic data for all
:19:29. > :19:34.patients rather than spurious opposition problems? As ever he is
:19:35. > :19:41.thinking intelligently about the problems we really face, and the
:19:42. > :19:46.question was asked by the Liberal Democrat member for Richmond Park
:19:47. > :19:49.about the security of the data files, but the security of
:19:50. > :19:54.electronic files is the issue we have to think about more serious
:19:55. > :19:59.states as we give everyone access to their records and because of issues
:20:00. > :20:06.around hacking, it is an issue we are taking seriously and working on.
:20:07. > :20:12.I wrote to the Secretary of State on behalf of a medical centre in my
:20:13. > :20:15.constituency in January but haven't yet had a reply, perhaps he could
:20:16. > :20:21.respond to my point about staff safety. We had an issue of patient
:20:22. > :20:28.safety but what about danger to staff of these records are not being
:20:29. > :20:32.available about patient? I would like to reflect on his question in
:20:33. > :20:37.more detail rather than giving an instant answer because to date no
:20:38. > :20:42.one has brought to my notice issues about staff safety but it is
:20:43. > :20:48.something we take seriously. We are aware of the extra administrative
:20:49. > :20:54.pressure on staff caught by leading to go through the records where
:20:55. > :20:58.there is a high risk of harm and we paid GP surgeries extra resources to
:20:59. > :21:06.cover that extra time but I will look into the issues he raises.
:21:07. > :21:10.Since 2015 it's been a statutory requirement to use a unique and
:21:11. > :21:17.consistent identifier on health and social care records, since this
:21:18. > :21:21.would help with putting date it electronically in the health and
:21:22. > :21:28.social care system, so could the Secretary of State update the House
:21:29. > :21:33.on that? I am happy to do so, when we can all access our health records
:21:34. > :21:39.there are potentially huge benefits to patients, in particular people
:21:40. > :21:43.with long-term conditions being able to take more control of what happens
:21:44. > :21:50.and spot mistakes that sometimes happen in records, this is a big
:21:51. > :21:54.finding from the US where people had more widespread access to records
:21:55. > :21:59.for longer, the issue is the security with which people accessed
:22:00. > :22:05.those records and we are looking at the systems used by banks, which are
:22:06. > :22:10.pretty robust, but whether we can have systems even more robust than
:22:11. > :22:14.those used by banks because it is important that patients have
:22:15. > :22:19.confidence that only they can access those records. Can he tell us which
:22:20. > :22:26.areas in the Midlands have been affected and given that I is an fine
:22:27. > :22:30.structures we have in the NHS, can he tell the House which of his
:22:31. > :22:38.ministerial team have the job of keeping watch on NHS Shared Business
:22:39. > :22:44.Service? The minister who was responsible for these areas is my
:22:45. > :22:51.honourable friend the minister for Oxford and West Abingdon, but in
:22:52. > :22:55.this case, this happened before she was in post and I took personal
:22:56. > :23:00.responsibility myself because it was such an important issue and I will
:23:01. > :23:05.write to him with more details about how the East Midlands was affected.
:23:06. > :23:11.Does the Minister agree it is vitally important we move toward a
:23:12. > :23:17.paperless NHS and it will be very difficult to do that for as long as
:23:18. > :23:21.National Health Service trusts can't talk to each other electronically.
:23:22. > :23:25.Meaning for example, images of radiological images are very often
:23:26. > :23:28.not available when patients see doctors, meaning patients after the
:23:29. > :23:39.test again, which is contrary to all the precepts of good practice. He's
:23:40. > :23:44.absolutely right. This is a very big part of our translation plans for
:23:45. > :23:47.the NHS. As much on summation plans. When the NHS does well
:23:48. > :23:51.internationally, are GP records are among the best of any country, and
:23:52. > :24:02.the GPs have done a fantastic job in the last 50 15 years. Where we are
:24:03. > :24:07.less good is in our hospital records, where you can still find
:24:08. > :24:12.paper records in widespread use. He's quite right, that's not just
:24:13. > :24:18.very, very expensive but also an safe at times.
:24:19. > :24:22.I used to work in a pathology lab and absolutely pains me to think of
:24:23. > :24:26.those results that are generated by the hard work of pathology staff,
:24:27. > :24:31.languishing in a warehouse somewhere, unseen by anybody. I know
:24:32. > :24:35.what GPs will do if they don't get those results, they will bring the
:24:36. > :24:39.laboratory and ask for them. Has the Secretary of State made any estimate
:24:40. > :24:45.to the time wasted in phone calls from GP services to pathology labs?
:24:46. > :24:51.Regrettably I'm sure that because of what happened extra work was created
:24:52. > :24:57.for GPs. But what I would say to the honourable lady is, it's because of
:24:58. > :25:02.GPs commitment to their impatience that it appears that in the vast of
:25:03. > :25:07.cases patient harm is avoided, because when results don't come
:25:08. > :25:10.through that GP is expecting, the GP chases those results and makes sure
:25:11. > :25:15.the right thing is done for patients. As you rightly says, at
:25:16. > :25:19.the cost of work. Would my right honourable friend
:25:20. > :25:24.agree with me that had the Labour government not made such a
:25:25. > :25:30.catastrophe of implementing the NHS computer system, that record such as
:25:31. > :25:33.these that have been digitalised many years ago and problems with
:25:34. > :25:38.storage of paper records would not have impacted the patients that are
:25:39. > :25:41.currently suffering? He does speak wisely, and I think
:25:42. > :25:45.that's why many members of the public will be faintly amused to
:25:46. > :25:50.hear the party opposite saying how important it is we move to
:25:51. > :25:55.electronic health records. It was an absolute catastrophe, the NHS IT
:25:56. > :25:58.project, costing billions of pounds. The intention was right that the
:25:59. > :26:04.delivery was wrong, and that's what we're trying to sort out.
:26:05. > :26:10.I understand that large numbers of patients in north-east London were
:26:11. > :26:15.affected by this failure of the service. Can the Secretary of State
:26:16. > :26:18.tell me how many of my constituents were affected? Can he tell me how
:26:19. > :26:23.many of those were cancer patients? Can he tell me how many would have
:26:24. > :26:29.been subjected to an inordinate delay in receiving referrals for
:26:30. > :26:33.treatment? Can he give that itemised breakdown to all members of
:26:34. > :26:36.Parliament who are in constituencies where we will have constituents
:26:37. > :26:41.affected by this? I'm very happy to write to
:26:42. > :26:46.honourable members in the areas affected with any extra information
:26:47. > :26:49.that we are able to provide. But what I'd reassure him is that to to
:26:50. > :26:52.date we have not been able to identify any patients in any part of
:26:53. > :27:00.the country that has come to harm as a result of what happened.
:27:01. > :27:04.It's a shame that the synthetic layout in the Labour Party was
:27:05. > :27:09.apparent when they were talking for a public inquiry into deaths in mid
:27:10. > :27:15.Staffordshire or the worst IT White elephant disaster, ?12 billion in
:27:16. > :27:22.2013. Isn't it the case that my right honourable friend, isn't it
:27:23. > :27:25.the case he's observed the appropriate Parliamentary
:27:26. > :27:28.accountability protocols in that he has not only employed clinical
:27:29. > :27:32.expertise but been to the House in July and his officials have updated
:27:33. > :27:36.the official accounts committee in September and come here today
:27:37. > :27:41.question that there is no cover up. I'm grateful to my honourable
:27:42. > :27:47.friend. As he rightly points out, this was a judgment call, because
:27:48. > :27:52.going public on what happened at a very early stage risked overwhelming
:27:53. > :27:56.GP surgeries, which would have meant GPs were not able to investigate the
:27:57. > :28:00.most serious cases as quickly as we needed. That's why I received very
:28:01. > :28:04.sensible advice to hold back. But I did decide that the House needed to
:28:05. > :28:08.know this before the summer break and that is why I made the effort
:28:09. > :28:12.that I did. A number of GP practices in Wirral
:28:13. > :28:17.West have made clear to me that concerns about capita's handling of
:28:18. > :28:22.confidential records. There are cases of records being delayed, in
:28:23. > :28:26.some instances records haven't arrived at all. As my colleague, the
:28:27. > :28:32.member for West Derby said, there also been the concern that where
:28:33. > :28:36.there is a patient that may be at risk because of some mental health
:28:37. > :28:40.issue, that is in flag to our medical staff. That's a very serious
:28:41. > :28:44.risk to put our staff under. Would my honourable friend shared the view
:28:45. > :28:47.of the chair of the BMA's GPs committee was that this is an
:28:48. > :28:52.example of what happens when the NHS tries to cut costs by inviting
:28:53. > :28:55.private companies to do work they then don't do properly?
:28:56. > :29:00.She does make very important points about the need for rapid transfer of
:29:01. > :29:05.records when people move GP surgeries. Can I just gently point
:29:06. > :29:08.out to her as well... I'm sure it's a question she was asked to say but
:29:09. > :29:12.the reality is, because of the failures of this contract, we have
:29:13. > :29:17.taken this work in-house. It is not about the Government is pressing on
:29:18. > :29:25.with privatisation irresponsibly or whatever is, this work is now done
:29:26. > :29:30.in-house. It seems to me, first of all we have
:29:31. > :29:36.an excellent Secretary of State, and the Government seems to have taken
:29:37. > :29:43.the appropriate action. My concern is what the Secretary of State said
:29:44. > :29:48.about his members saying that how should not be informed. I remember
:29:49. > :29:52.under Gordon Brown and Tony Blair on the last day of term we would have
:29:53. > :29:55.80 odd written statements. It would be better of the written statement
:29:56. > :29:57.was made earlier in the week so members could have considered
:29:58. > :30:06.whether an urgent question was appropriate.
:30:07. > :30:10.I think... Inordinate circumstances he makes a reasonable point. -- in
:30:11. > :30:14.ordinary circumstances. He may remember there were other things
:30:15. > :30:18.happening at that time last year. As I say, I had only been reappointed
:30:19. > :30:22.for a week so there were other things. My priority was to make sure
:30:23. > :30:26.we didn't go away for the summer without the House being informed of
:30:27. > :30:34.the situation. The Minister says he has paid people
:30:35. > :30:39.to clear this backdrop. I'm assuming they are GPs. How much have you paid
:30:40. > :30:47.the GPs and are you intending to re-coop that money back to the NHS?
:30:48. > :30:50.I have no plans to recoup anything but the Secretary of State might
:30:51. > :30:55.have. I regret to say the ?2.2 million
:30:56. > :31:00.that was paid to GPs has gone to GPs for the extra work that needs to be
:31:01. > :31:04.done and that is fair payment for the extra time that they have taken.
:31:05. > :31:08.It is indeed a cost to the taxpayer, but it was the right thing to do.
:31:09. > :31:16.The question... ?2.2 million, for the second time.
:31:17. > :31:21.Could the Secretary of State reassure the House that throughout
:31:22. > :31:25.appropriate staffing resources have been made available to deal with
:31:26. > :31:31.these backlogs, not just nationally but also in the East Midlands?
:31:32. > :31:37.We have always been concerned to make sure, because of the extra
:31:38. > :31:42.administrative work involved, going through more than 700,000 records,
:31:43. > :31:46.other patients using the NHS to find their care is delayed. That is why
:31:47. > :31:52.we made extra resources available for GP practices, so that they could
:31:53. > :31:54.get the resources in to do that without interrupting the ordinary
:31:55. > :31:59.work they have to do for their patients.
:32:00. > :32:06.Surely the Secretary of State would agree with me that if everything was
:32:07. > :32:09.going swimmingly in the NHS, if we were investing like our European
:32:10. > :32:13.neighbours in the NHS, if we had people who were confident that their
:32:14. > :32:18.A were safe, that their trusts were safe, that they, that the whole
:32:19. > :32:21.health service wasn't in trouble, the privatisation was by chewing
:32:22. > :32:26.into the NHS, this could be put into proportion. But the NHS under his
:32:27. > :32:32.watch is in chaos. That's why we are so worried about these items.
:32:33. > :32:36.Let me gently remind the honourable gentleman that because of decisions
:32:37. > :32:38.this government has taken we're actually now investing more than the
:32:39. > :32:42.European average in the NHS. Something that would have been much
:32:43. > :32:47.more difficult to do if we'd followed his own party's plans.
:32:48. > :32:51.He tries to characterise our approach, suggesting that the NHS
:32:52. > :32:56.doesn't have a problem. We think the NHS has got some very big problems.
:32:57. > :32:59.It's working hard to tackle them but we are providing more doctors, more
:33:00. > :33:04.nurses, more funding and more operations than ever before in its
:33:05. > :33:08.history. I commend the Secretary of State for
:33:09. > :33:13.his response to the situation once he was told about it. Welcome his
:33:14. > :33:19.pledge to provide constituency why data to the House. My constituents
:33:20. > :33:25.in Kettering will be amazed that for five years no one spotted that
:33:26. > :33:30.700,000 records had gone missing. Can I ask him, how was it
:33:31. > :33:33.discovered, and why is it that in these three areas such a large
:33:34. > :33:41.amount of data effectively disappeared from public view?
:33:42. > :33:47.Well, I wish I could give him the answer to that question! LAUGHTER
:33:48. > :33:52.I do think it is, I do think it is completely extraordinary that for
:33:53. > :33:55.such a long period of time it wasn't noticed that this data had gone
:33:56. > :34:00.missing. I think it was discovered towards
:34:01. > :34:04.the end of the SPS contract, and I think there are lessons in the NHS
:34:05. > :34:09.which relate very closely to what other honourable members have said,
:34:10. > :34:12.about the dangers of overreliance on paper rather than electronic
:34:13. > :34:15.systems, where it is much, much easier to keep track of what's
:34:16. > :34:20.happening. And let me say to the honourable
:34:21. > :34:26.gentleman opposite, who continues to make comments from the sedentary
:34:27. > :34:29.position, that when it comes to making the NHS electronic, I think
:34:30. > :34:32.people will compare his government's record and hours and say which is
:34:33. > :34:38.better. I'm sure our members across this
:34:39. > :34:42.house will be able to identify with the anxiety caused while waiting for
:34:43. > :34:46.test results or diagnoses, I certainly can. Does he concur with
:34:47. > :34:51.me it will be of scant consolation to those 700 and odd thousand people
:34:52. > :34:57.who were told their letters weren't lost but were residing in a
:34:58. > :35:03.warehouse somewhere? It is completely an acceptable in
:35:04. > :35:08.the supply is no longer performing that job for the NHS. Of course, it
:35:09. > :35:11.causes frustration for many people when their information they are
:35:12. > :35:15.waiting for doesn't reach their GP surgery. I think the most important
:35:16. > :35:19.thing she and I would agree with is the safety of patients, and that's
:35:20. > :35:23.why our biggest priority in this has not been about the administrative
:35:24. > :35:26.inconvenience, frustrating though it is, but to understand of any
:35:27. > :35:32.patients have actually been put at risk.
:35:33. > :35:37.This morning I was very pleased to tour the new clinical assessment
:35:38. > :35:41.unit that was opened last month at Crawley Hospital, partly made
:35:42. > :35:46.possible because that space used to store paper records and now they
:35:47. > :35:52.have moved to an electronic records. Can I commend the Secretary of State
:35:53. > :35:59.for increasing that drive to electronic records rather than using
:36:00. > :36:02.paper? And can I urge him to redouble his efforts in that
:36:03. > :36:06.respect? I'm very happy to follow my
:36:07. > :36:12.honourable friend's advice in this respect. I think we all know that
:36:13. > :36:15.proper use of electronic records creates huge opportunities, but we
:36:16. > :36:20.have to carry the public with us and we have to make sure we have that
:36:21. > :36:27.confidence that that data is going to be held securely, which is why we
:36:28. > :36:34.have introduced a new Guardian, the patients watchdog in this area.
:36:35. > :36:39.NHS shared business services Limited exists for one reason only and that
:36:40. > :36:44.is to deliver ?1 billion in savings by 2020. The results of this
:36:45. > :36:49.government's ideological obsession with savings and austerity is surely
:36:50. > :36:54.now laid bare for all to see. We are quite lucky, quite literally that we
:36:55. > :36:58.didn't kill anyone. Wilbur Secretary of State agreed to meet with the
:36:59. > :37:01.Chancellor urgently to discuss increased funding for our health
:37:02. > :37:07.service that is being starved of resources it needs to run
:37:08. > :37:09.effectively? -- will the Secretary of State?
:37:10. > :37:15.The ideological obsession with savings and austerity as we have
:37:16. > :37:20.increased the NHS twice as much as they have in Scotland.
:37:21. > :37:24.As the Secretary of State is aware, patient safety is absolutely
:37:25. > :37:29.paramount. For the benefit of my constituents can you confirm that
:37:30. > :37:32.patient safety was, throughout this process, and remained his primary
:37:33. > :37:38.concern? She is absolutely right. That has
:37:39. > :37:43.been our primary concern. I think it also needs to be our primary concern
:37:44. > :37:49.as we examine the lessons that need to be learned as a result of this.
:37:50. > :37:52.Both in terms of the setting of contracts with the private sector
:37:53. > :37:53.and also the monitoring of those contracts, both of which were
:37:54. > :38:03.clearly deficient in this case. The Secretary of State was
:38:04. > :38:10.responsible for nearly the entirety of this contract but has told us he
:38:11. > :38:15.doesn't know how it came to light to NHS England. Do you think he should
:38:16. > :38:19.have been better prepared and what assurances can he give us that he
:38:20. > :38:29.now has controls in place for future contracts? If she listened to the
:38:30. > :38:37.facts I told her, what happened over 700,000 records have been shut, 2500
:38:38. > :38:42.high-risk ones are being checked by two clinicians and 80% have been
:38:43. > :38:47.shut, a huge amount of work has been done to clear up the situation. I
:38:48. > :38:51.agree it was unacceptable that it happened but we are not the first
:38:52. > :39:05.government where suppliers have let us down. Resign! A few moments ago
:39:06. > :39:11.the Secretary of State added to do what he called teething problems
:39:12. > :39:15.with Capita had GP practices in my constituency have told me those
:39:16. > :39:20.problems are worsening. How much longer will he give Capita to
:39:21. > :39:25.perform under their contract with thick Capita -- the Department of
:39:26. > :39:32.Health and if they cannot, how quickly will he decide to take that
:39:33. > :39:36.work back in-house? If they do not perform we will take all necessary
:39:37. > :39:40.measures including ending the contract, but she is right there
:39:41. > :39:45.have been problems with that contract in its early days. We
:39:46. > :39:56.believe this situation is improving but there still to be made. Order.
:39:57. > :40:03.Point of order, Mr Speaker. A plethora of points of order. Last
:40:04. > :40:07.Friday after debates on Private Members' Bills, the honourable
:40:08. > :40:15.member for Redcar left the chamber and briefed to the media at large
:40:16. > :40:18.that my speech on the Istanbul convention had stopped her bill from
:40:19. > :40:25.being debated and had in effect blocked it, despite me saying I
:40:26. > :40:30.supported her bill. This has led to my office receiving some widespread
:40:31. > :40:37.and unjustified abuse that they should not be subjected to. The
:40:38. > :40:38.honourable lady for Redcar's bill was the eighth to be considered on
:40:39. > :40:42.Friday.