Conservative MP for Totnes Sarah Wollaston
Show Hide image

Sarah Wollaston to fight for health committee chairmanship

Independent-minded Tory MP to run for post.

Conservative MP Sarah Wollaston has declared her intention to stand for the chairmanship of the Commons Health Select Committee.

Her announcement today follows the surprise resignation of Conservative chair Stephen Dorrell two days ago.

Wollaston, Tory MP for Totnes, in effect announced his departure herself, after tweeting “I’m sorry to hear he is standing down as chair with immediate effect” on Tuesday morning, which apparently caught even Dorrell’s media team off guard.

A former GP and health committee member, her background in healthcare stands her in good stead for the committee's top role. So far her only other rival to declare interest in the post is fellow doctor Philip Lee, Tory MP for Bracknell.

While Lee can boast that, as a practising MP, he still has a hand in the health sector, Wollaston sees her independence from the NHS as a boon.

She told me today that while hands-on experience in the NHS is invaluable for a politician looking at health care, that her departure from the sector affords her greater impartiality. She gave up her memberships to the British Medical Association and the Royal College of General Practioners when she entered Parliament.

She said: "I left my clinical practice completely behind when I came into politics, so I'm not intending to be there representing the medical profession if I were elected. I think you're there to represent the public."

Selected as a parliamentary candidate in an American-style open primary, Wollaston has proven herself an outspoken politician since 2010.

A thorn in the side of David Cameron, she has attacked government failure to address pressing health issues, such as the minimum pricing of alcohol, and jibed the Prime Minister personally. Last year she criticised his inner circle for still being “too white, male, and privileged”.

Given her ability to provoke the Conservative leadership,  Wollaston is likely to prove a popular choice among Labour MPs for chairmanship of the health committee. It is worth pointing out, however, that her independent-mindedness has earnt her genuine respect from all tribes as well.

The role, which demands impartiality, would suit her in many ways, as she has been an vocal critic of crude party politics. She told me she would be “very keen” on the role partially because it eschews “overtly tribal politics” and praised former chair Dorrell for his “consensual style and clear impartiality”.

She said: “Select committees have become so much more effective since the Wright committee reforms [which included the election of committee chairs by the Commons rather selection by the whips], so it’s a job I’d be fascinated to do.

"We need indepth scrutiny of the health service - its finances and operations - now more than ever, having handed back so many powers to NHS England in particular."

Wollaston said that, were she to be elected as health committee chair, among her top priorities would be work on variation in practice across the NHS; mental health care; personalised care; examining outcomes and their use as tools, for example, in early diagnosis; and scaling back tender processes for small contracts where unnecessary.

Lucy Fisher writes about politics and is the winner of the Anthony Howard Award 2013. She tweets @LOS_Fisher.

 

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Forget gaining £350m a week, Brexit would cost the UK £300m a week

Figures from the government's own Office for Budget Responsibility reveal the negative economic impact Brexit would have. 

Even now, there are some who persist in claiming that Boris Johnson's use of the £350m a week figure was accurate. The UK's gross, as opposed to net EU contribution, is precisely this large, they say. Yet this ignores that Britain's annual rebate (which reduced its overall 2016 contribution to £252m a week) is not "returned" by Brussels but, rather, never leaves Britain to begin with. 

Then there is the £4.1bn that the government received from the EU in public funding, and the £1.5bn allocated directly to British organisations. Fine, the Leavers say, the latter could be better managed by the UK after Brexit (with more for the NHS and less for agriculture).

But this entire discussion ignores that EU withdrawal is set to leave the UK with less, rather than more, to spend. As Carl Emmerson, the deputy director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, notes in a letter in today's Times: "The bigger picture is that the forecast health of the public finances was downgraded by £15bn per year - or almost £300m per week - as a direct result of the Brexit vote. Not only will we not regain control of £350m weekly as a result of Brexit, we are likely to make a net fiscal loss from it. Those are the numbers and forecasts which the government has adopted. It is perhaps surprising that members of the government are suggesting rather different figures."

The Office for Budget Responsibility forecasts, to which Emmerson refers, are shown below (the £15bn figure appearing in the 2020/21 column).

Some on the right contend that a blitz of tax cuts and deregulation following Brexit would unleash  higher growth. But aside from the deleterious economic and social consequences that could result, there is, as I noted yesterday, no majority in parliament or in the country for this course. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.