Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Cancer Strategies

Wednesday 12 March 2025 · 2 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 2 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Clive Jones raised concerns about cancer targets not being met by health boards in Wales since August 2020, resulting in long waits for patients.
  • The minister responded by highlighting positive progress on NHS waiting lists and mentioned that both governments are collaborating to improve the NHS.
  • The minister confirmed that the Welsh Government has committed over 600 million in extra funding for NHS improvements, including specific measures for cancer care.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Clive Jones Lib Dem Wokingham
NHS Wales
Context

In August 2020, no health board in Wales met its cancer target, leading to long wait times for patients and poor uptake of screening programmes. The Department of Health and Social Care is developing a strategy for England.

Question

Since August 2020, not a single health board in Wales has met its cancer target, leaving patients waiting months for their referral to start treatment, and despite recommendations to implement screening programmes properly, the standard for uptake is not being achieved, leading to poorer health outcomes. As the Department of Health and Social Care embarks on developing a strategy for England, how will the Secretary of State for Wales ensure that those issues are not repeated there?

Answer from The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Dame Nia Griffith)

I can tell the hon. Gentleman that there is now positive progress on waiting lists. Both Governments are working together in a spirit of genuine collaboration to cut NHS waiting lists and build an NHS fit for the future. The Welsh Government have committed more than £600 million in extra funding to health and social care in their budget for 2025-26. They are also setting up a national cancer leadership board to improve cancer care. Thanks to those investments, Welsh NHS services are improving, including for cancer, and waiting lists are falling.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The answer did not address the specific issues of missed targets and poor screening programme implementation in Wales that could be repeated in England's strategy.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email
Q2 Alex Barros-Curtis Lab Cardiff West
NHS Scotland
Context

The Welsh Government committed over £600 million in extra funding for health and social care, including specific initiatives on cancer care. The Conservative Party voted against this budget.

Question

Will my hon. Friend outline how she is working in partnership with the Welsh Government to improve cancer and health outcomes? Could she try to help me understand why on earth, in the Welsh budget vote last week, the Conservatives and Plaid Cymru voted against £600 million more for our Welsh NHS?

Answer from The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Dame Nia Griffith)

I really cannot explain why Conservative colleagues in the Senedd voted against that budget. Not only are the Welsh Government delivering £600 million; they are also delivering a specific package on cancer care. The initial phase, which is going to focus on breast, skin, gynaecological, lower gastrointestinal and neurological cancers, will improve productivity and efficiency in how health boards deliver care. This includes sending people straight to tests without an out-patient appointment. Alongside this, the Welsh Government are implementing a wider range of service improvements, from reducing smoking and tackling obesity to HPV vaccination and diagnostic and generic strategies.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The answer did not address why Conservative colleagues in the Senedd voted against the budget, only stating that she could not explain it.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email