← Back to Westminster Hall Debates

Hospice Services: Support

14 June 2023

Lead MP

Paul Holmes
Hamble Valley
Con

Responding Minister

Helen Whately

Tags

NHSSocial CareEconomyEmploymentEnergyStandards & Ethics
Word Count: 14255
Other Contributors: 26

At a Glance

Paul Holmes raised concerns about hospice services: support in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key Requests to Government:

The hon. Member called on the Government to take action and treat the charity care sector with the priority it deserves. He asked for continued funding support that covers staffing and energy cost rises, as well as a long-term funding settlement for hospices in order to ensure they can continue providing vital services.

How the Debate Unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:

Lead Contributor

Hamble Valley
Opened the debate
The hon. Member for Hamble Valley highlighted the significant challenges faced by hospices, including rising staffing and energy costs, staff shortages, and increased demand for services despite a lack of financial support from local NHS commissioning groups. He cited Mountbatten hospice in his constituency as an example, noting that it is facing a £1.4 million deficit and a 5% rise in costs next year with no corresponding change in its NHS contract. The hon. Member also pointed out that the energy bill for Mountbatten has risen by £250,000, a fivefold increase, which has not been mitigated through any additional financial support.

Government Response

Helen Whately
Government Response
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Nokes. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Eastleigh (Paul Holmes) for securing this debate on hospices, and I thank all hon. Members who have contributed. The number of colleagues in the room and the passion of so many contributions show the strength of feeling and level of support for hospices in all our communities. My hon. Friend the Member for Eastleigh spoke about the Mountbatten hospice in his constituency and how it cared wonderfully for his friend and colleague Sue Hall. Many hon. Members spoke about their personal experiences, involving family members, and the amazing ways that hospices have helped families and themselves through difficult times. The minister highlighted the importance of dying well—dying with dignity and dying with the right care in the place where a person wants to die, which is often at home. Hospices are an important part of end-of-life and palliative care in communities, providing care in their facilities as well as in patients' homes. Financial pressures on hospices have been a strong theme of the debate. Many hospices face extra pressures from energy costs and higher staff pay. The Government's energy bill relief scheme has provided support for eligible organisations, including hospices. NHS England released £1.5 billion of extra funding to integrated care boards (ICBs) in recognition of inflationary pressures on services they commission. ICBs are responsible for distributing that funding according to local need, including to palliative and end-of-life care providers in communities. The minister committed to continuing to dig into getting visibility on the extent to which extra funding is going through to hospices, seeking transparency about the extent of support. She also mentioned working with NHS England to ensure greater visibility relating to what that means in practice and what is being commissioned. For children's hospices, NHS England provided £25 million specifically for palliative care during this financial year. The minister assured hon. Members that she has been speaking to NHS England about funding beyond this year. Against the backdrop of financial concerns, it is important that hospices are not solely financially dependent on the state and the NHS for funding; they receive some NHS funding but rely on fundraising as well.
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy

About Westminster Hall Debates

Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.