A third of Blackpool's five-year-olds have tooth decay says MP
Webb told BBC Radio Lancashire the mother of the four-year-old boy felt "helpless" and it was "heart-breaking"."She didn't know where to turn, her son's constantly in pain," he said."To treat that with ibuprofen rather than getting into a dentist to solve the problem is just wrong and it just shows how badly the system's been broken and that has to change.""Too many kids are turning up at A&E with a tooth problem, but at that point it's too late and the only course of action is extraction."
'Empty facilities'
An survey in February of 10 dental practices in Blackpool by the local branch of consumer health service champion Healthwatch found none were accepting NHS patients.Webb told MPs in a debate on access to NHS Dentistry the problem "seems to be more prevalent in Blackpool because of the deprivation" and it was "essential" to educate parents to make sure they supervised children brushing their teeth.He said he has been unable to find an NHS dentist in the town for himself since he became an MP a year ago, even though he has been told they have capacity."I've seen dentists where they've got new, fantastic facilities empty because they're not taking any more NHS patients," he said. "So we've got to look at the contract and make sure that it's financially viable and it's incentivised for them to take on more patients."Responding on behalf of the government, Smyth, said: "There are no perfect pay models and careful consideration is being given to any changes to the complex dental system, so that we deliver genuine improvements for patients and the profession."It is an immense challenge, there are no quick fixes and no easy answers, but people across the country deserve better access and we're determined to make that happen."
Listen to the best of BBC Radio Lancashire on BBC Sounds and follow BBC Lancashire on Facebook, X and Instagram and watch BBC North West Tonight on BBC iPlayer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Martin Lewis urges more than a million pensioners to claim benefit worth at least £3,800
Money expert Martin Lewis has issued a fresh call for eligible pensioners to check if they could get thousands of pounds a year through an 'underclaimed' government benefit. Attendance Allowance is designated for pensioners aged 66 and over who have a disability or health condition severe enough to require regular assistance. The benefit administered by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) offers two rates, potentially providing an extra £3,842.80 or £5,644 annually. Crucially, eligibility is not dependent on income or savings, meaning anyone who qualifies will receive the payment regardless of their financial circumstances. Writing to followers in his latest Money Saving Expert newsletter, Mr Lewis said: 'For many older people who are ill or start to face mental or physical disability, life doesn't just get tougher, it gets costlier too. 'That's why 18 months ago we launched our Attendance Allowance guide and awareness campaign, and successes have flooded in since. Yet it remains massively underclaimed.' He adds that an estimated 1.1 million eligible pensioners are missing out on the benefit, according to figures from Policy in Practice, meaning that more awareness is needed. A wide range of common health conditions could qualify a person for Attendance Allowance, including arthritis, blindness, heart disease, Parkinson's, and asthma. The two payment rates depend on the level of care required. The higher rate is worth £110.40 a week, while the lower rate provides £73.90 a week. Although the DWP states the benefit is intended to help with care costs, recipients are free to spend the money as they wish. How to claim Attendance Allowance To be eligible for Attendance Allowance, applicants must have reached pension age, which is currently 66. The benefit can be claimed irrespective of state pension payments, savings, or whether the individual is still earning a regular income. The application form is lengthy, but charities such as Citizens Advice and Age UK offer support with the process and provide tips for online applications. To be eligible, an applicant must have a physical disability, mental disability, or health condition severe enough to necessitate help for their own or someone else's safety, and this assistance must have been required for at least the past six months. To qualify for the lower rate, frequent supervision or attention is needed during the day or night. The higher rate applies if this is required both day and night, or if the individual is nearing the end of their life. Applicants must also be in Great Britain when they claim, and have been in the country for at least two of the last three years. Agents from the DWP typically make decisions based on the information provided in the form, making it essential to include all relevant details, such as a national insurance number, NHS number, prescription and hospital records. This process means most applicants will not undergo an in-person assessment, although it is possible "if it's unclear how your disability or health condition affects you," the DWP states, in which case a medical professional will conduct an examination. It is important to note that Attendance Allowance cannot be claimed if the individual is already receiving Personal Independence Payment (PIP) or Disability Living Allowance (DLA).
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Starmer's fury over Afghan data breach as he warns Tories ‘have questions to answer'
Keir Starmer has vented his fury over the cover-up of the catastrophic data breach that risked the lives of up to 100,000 Afghans, as it emerged no one had faced action over the huge blunder. The prime minister said the leak should never have happened and that Tory ministers have 'serious questions to answer', a day after an unprecedented superinjunction was lifted. Ben Wallace, who was defence secretary at the time the draconian legal order was granted, earlier said he took full responsibility for the leak, which happened when an MoD official released a spreadsheet containing the names of 18,000 Afghans "in error". But questions have been raised over why no one has been fired over the breach, which put the lives of those with links to UK forces in danger of reprisals from the Taliban, amid calls for further investigation. It comes as the chair of a powerful Commons committee has written to the Information Commissioner, applying pressure for a rethink on its decision not to investigate the breach, which cost the taxpayer billions in relocating thousands of affected Afghans to the UK. At the start of a tense Prime Minister's Questions, Sir Keir expressed his anger, telling MPs: "We warned in opposition about Conservative management of this policy and yesterday, the defence secretary set out the full extent of the failings that we inherited: a major data breach, a super injunction, a secret route that has already cost hundreds of millions of pounds. "Ministers who served under the party opposite have serious questions to answer about how this was ever allowed to happen." He suggested the Conservatives should "welcome" scrutiny from the Commons Defence Committee, which has vowed to investigate. In a dramatic intervention just hours later, right-wing former home secretary Suella Braverman revealed that there were splits in the Tory government over how to deal with the breach and said she had opposed the superinjunction and the new secret route set up to bring those affected to the UK. In a scathing statement, Ms Braverman condemned the former Tory government, then led by Rishi Sunak, in which she played a major role before she was sacked by the former prime minister. She said: 'There is much more that needs to be said about the conduct of the MoD, both ministers and officials, and the House of Commons is the right place to do so. I hope we have the opportunity soon. 'What has happened is outrageous and must never happen again. We must therefore be very clear about what that was and how it happened. 'The cover-up was wrong, the super injunction was wrong, and the failure to stop unwanted mass immigration has been unforgivable. So, I am sorry: the Conservative government failed you and its leaders let you down. It wasn't good enough then. It's not good enough now.' Mr Sunak, ex-defence secretary Grant Shapps and former armed forces minister James Heappey, who oversaw the cover-up, have all been contacted for comment, but none have broken cover and have all remained silent on the breach. Amid calls for further investigation into the breach, Defence Secretary John Healey said that 'accountability starts now' after admitting that he was uncomfortable with the way that the information had been covered up for three years. The Commons Defence Committee confirmed it would launch its own inquiry, and Dame Chi Onwurah, chair of the Commons committee for science innovation and technology, is writing to the Information Commissioner pushing for an investigation. The Information Commissioner has so far declined to hold its own probe, despite previously issuing a fine of £305,000 for a much smaller MoD data breach. Dame Chi told The Independent: 'A leak of this magnitude is, of course, extremely worrying and the fact that it happened in the Ministry of Defence brings the additional dimension of security concerns. The Defence Select Committee Office (ICO) will be undertaking a full inquiry, in the meantime I will be writing to the Information Commissioner to ask for more details on his office's role in this case.' Jon Baines, a senior data protection specialist at Mishcon de Reya, expressed bafflement at the commissioner's attitude to the breach. He said: 'I have not seen such unanimous bafflement from the data protection commentariat at the ICO's lack of apparent interest. 'There is a potential argument that there is no point in a big fine against the MoD when it would punish the public purse. 'Enforcement is not just about fines. The information commissioner has the power to lay a report before parliament. I have been banging on for years about the issue of hidden data in spreadsheets, and if I were the commissioner, I would be thinking about how I can raise the issue. 'A report before parliament would give them publicity, raise the issue and seize parliament.' The ICO has not responded to The Independent 's request for comment. Meanwhile, a member of the defence select committee has warned against naming and shaming the individual responsible for the breach and said the committee should instead look at a failure of government. Confirming the committee would launch an inquiry, its chair, Labour MP Tan Dhesi, told BBC Radio 4's The World at One Programme: "We want to get to the bottom of what has happened on behalf of parliament, which has been sidelined for too long on this issue.' "Ultimately, I think the fact there has been no parliamentary scrutiny, that nobody's been held to account on this, is just not on at all." Leyton and Wanstead Labour MP Calvin Bailey, who was a key figure in organising flights out of Kabul when allied forces went into a chaotic retreat as the Taliban swept to power in 2021, called for 'proper scrutiny' on the matter. He said: 'We need to go back and give proper scrutiny to everything, not just the data breach, the whole culture management and oversight of the operation, of the extraction recovery, the foreign policy and the military engagement and involvement. 'We will probably find that people were working under duress and pressure, because there were too few people to deal with the crisis.' He also warned that the defence committee was 'best placed to do the necessary work' as a full public inquiry 'would take too long and be too expensive'.
Telegraph
22 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Talking freely about Islam ‘feared more than any other religion'
People are more fearful of speaking freely about Islam than any other religion, a survey has found. Almost twice as many adults feel they have to hold back on expressing their views about the faith as they do for Christianity, according to research by the Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE), which advises the Government. The study, to be published on Thursday, also found that Islam was the only religion which more people felt was protected 'too much' rather than 'too little'. A quarter of those who held back on speaking out on religious topics said they did so because of fears about their safety. Some 46 per cent said they had done so to avoid causing offence or starting an argument. The study, based on interviews with 2,500 people, was conducted by Ipsos UK for the CCE.
