“The target was never particularly ambitious,” says the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) about Labour’s plan to add two million extra NHS appointments during their first year in power.
In February, Health Secretary Wes Streeting announced they had achieved the feat early. He recently described the now 3.6m additional appointments achieved in their first eight months as a “massive increase”.
But new data, obtained by independent fact checking charity Full Fact and shared exclusively with Sky News, reveals this figure actually signalled a slowing down in new NHS activity.
There was an even larger rise of 4.2m extra appointments over the same period the year before, under Rishi Sunak’s government.
The data also reveals how unambitious the target was in the first place.
We now know two million extra appointments over the course of a year represents a rise of less than 3% of the almost 70 million carried out in the year to June 2024.
In the last year under Mr Sunak, the rise was 10% – and the year before that it was 8%.
Responding to the findings, Sarah Scobie, deputy director of independent health and social care think tank the Nuffield Trust, told Sky News the two million target was “very modest”.
She said delivering that number of appointments “won’t come close to bringing the treatment waiting list back to pre-pandemic levels, or to meeting longer-term NHS targets”.
The IFS said it was smaller than the annual growth in demand pressures forecast by the government.
What exactly did Labour promise?
The Labour election manifesto said: “As a first step, in England we will deliver an extra two million NHS operations, scans, and appointments every year; that is 40,000 more appointments every week.”
We asked the government many times exactly how it would measure the pledge, as did policy experts from places like the IFS and Full Fact. But it repeatedly failed to explain how it was defined.
Leo Benedictus, a journalist and fact-checker at Full Fact, told Sky News: “We didn’t know how they were defining these appointments.
“When they said that there would be more of them, we didn’t know what there would be more of.”
Image: Leo Benedictus
Even once in government, initially Labour did not specify their definition of “operations, scans, and appointments”, or what the baseline “extra” was being measured against.
This prevented us and others from measuring progress every month when NHS stats were published. Did it include, for instance, mental health and A&E appointments? And when is the two million extra comparison dating from?
Target met, promise kept?
Suddenly, in February, the government announced the target had already been met – and ever since, progress on appointments has been a key boast of ministers and Labour MPs.
At this point, they did release some information: the definition of procedures that allowed them to claim what had been achieved. They said the target involved is elective – non-emergency – operations excluding maternity and mental health services; outpatient appointments and diagnostic tests.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:05
Why has Starmer axed NHS England?
However, we still did not have a comprehensive baseline to measure the two million increase against.
The government data instead relied on a snapshot: comparing the number of appointments carried out from July to November 2024 with the number from July to November 2023, and adjusted them for the number of working days in each period.
This did not tell us if the NHS had already been adding appointments under the Conservatives, and at what pace, and therefore whether this target was a big impressive ramping up of activity or, as it turns out, actually a slowing down.
Since then, a number of organisations, like Full Fact, have been fighting with the government to release the data.
Mr Benedictus said: “We asked them for that information. They didn’t publish it. We didn’t have it.
“The only way we could get hold of it was by submitting an FOI request, which they had to answer. And when that came back about a month later, it was fascinating.”
This finally gives us the comparative data allowing us to see what the baseline is against which the government’s “success” is being measured.
A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “On entering office last July, the secretary of state [Wes Streeting] was advised that the fiscal black hole meant elective appointments would have to be cut by 20,000 every week.
“Instead, this government provided the extra investment and has already delivered 3.6 million additional appointments – more than the manifesto commitment the British public voted for – while also getting more patients seen within 18 weeks.
“In the nine months since this government took office, the waiting list has dropped by over 200,000 – more than five times as much as it had over the same period the previous year – and also fell for six consecutive months in a row.”
Image: Health Secretary Wes Streeting. Pic: PA
We put this to Jeremy Hunt, Rishi Sunak’s chancellor during his last two years as prime minister, and health secretary for six years under David Cameron and Theresa May.
He said: “What these numbers seem to show is that the rate of appointments was going up by more in the last government than it is by this government. That’s really disappointing when you look at the crisis in the NHS.
“All the evidence is that if you want to increase the number of people being treated, you need more capacity in the system, and you need the doctors and nurses that are there to be working more productively.
“Instead what we’ve had from this government is the vast majority of the extra funding for the NHS has gone into pay rises, without asking for productivity in return.”
Image: Jeremy Hunt speaks to Sky’s Sam Coates
Edward Argar, shadow health secretary, accused the government of a “weak attempt […] to claim credit for something that was already happening”.
“We need to see real and meaningful reform that will genuinely move the dial for patients,” he added.
Is the NHS getting better or worse?
New polling carried out by YouGov on behalf of Sky News this week also reveals 39% of people think the NHS has got worse over the past year, compared with 12% who think it’s got better.
Six in 10 people say they do not trust Keir Starmer personally on the issue of the NHS, compared with three in 10 who say they do.
That is a better rating than some of his rivals, however. Just 21% of people say they trust Nigel Farage with the NHS, and only 16% trust Kemi Badenoch – compared with 64% and 60% who do not.
Ed Davey performs better, with 30% saying they trust him and 38% saying they do not.
Ms Scobie of the Nuffield Trust told Sky News “the government is right to make reducing long hospital treatment waits a key priority […] but much faster growth in activity is needed for the NHS to see a substantial improvement in waiting times for patients.”
The government is correct, however, to point out the waiting list having dropped by more than 200,000 since it’s been in office. This is the biggest decline between one July and the following February since current waiting list statistics were first published under Gordon Brown.
The percentage of people waiting less than 18 weeks for treatment is also falling for the first time, other than a brief period during the pandemic, for the first time in more than a decade.
The latest figures show 6.25m people waiting for 7.42m treatments (some people are on the list for more than one issue). That means more than one in 10 people in England are currently waiting for NHS treatment.
There continues to be a fall in the number who have been waiting longer than a year. It’s now 180,242, down from almost 400,000 in August 2023 and over 300,000 in June 2024, the Conservatives’ last month in power.
But that number is still incredibly high by historical standards. It remains over 100 times higher than it was before the pandemic.
The government has a separate pledge that no more than 8% of patients will wait longer than 18 weeks for treatment, by the time of the next election. Despite improvements in recent months, currently more than 40% wait longer than this.
The Data and Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.
The chief rabbi has described the BBC’s response to anti-IDF chanting at Glastonbury as “belated and mishandled” – as the punk-rap duo involved, Bob Vylan, said the UK government needed to talk about its “criminal inaction”.
Sir Ephraim Mirvis said “vile Jew-hatred” had been aired at the Somerset music festival and it was a “time of national shame”.
Confidence in the BBC’s “ability to treat antisemitism seriously” has been brought to a “new low”, he said in a post on X, adding that “outright incitement to violence and hatred” appeared to be acceptable if it was couched as “edgy political commentary”.
Ordinary people had not only failed to see incitement “for what it is” but had cheered it, chanted it, and celebrated it, he said. “Toxic Jew-hatred is a threat to our entire society,” he added.
Bob Vylan, posting a new statement on Instagram on Tuesday, said they were “not for the death of Jews, Arabs or any other race or group of people”.
Rather, they were for the “dismantling of a violent military machine” – the Israel Defence Forces.
Bob Vylan chanted “death to the IDF” at Glastonbury. As many as 95% of the IDF are thought to be Jewish.
In their statement, the group said they were a “distraction from the story” and that whatever “sanctions” they received would also be a distraction.
Their US visas have been revoked and United Talent Agency, their US representatives, have dropped them.
Image: Bob Vylan with their MOBO award in London in November 2022. Pic: Reuters
Referring to the war in Gaza, they claimed the UK government does not want them to ask “why they remain silent in the face of this atrocity”, “why they aren’t doing more to stop the killing” and “feed the starving”.
They added: “The more time they talk about Bob Vylan, the less time they spend answering for their criminal inaction.
“We are being targeted for speaking up. We are not the first, we will not be the last, and if you care for the sanctity of human life and freedom of speech, we urge you to speak up, too.”
It has emerged that Tim Davie, the BBC’s director-general, was at Glastonbury when the duo led chants of “Death to the IDF” which were broadcast live.
The prime minister’s spokesman, asked if the PM had confidence in Mr Davie, said Sir Keir Starmer had “confidence in the BBC”, adding: “The position of the director-general is a matter for the BBC’s board.”
Speaking in the Commons, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said “accountability” was important and it was something she had “impressed upon the BBC leadership”.
She added: “When you have one editorial failure, it’s something that must be gripped. When you have several, it becomes a problem of leadership.”
The cabinet minister said she’d called Mr Davie after Bob Vylan’s set had been broadcast to find out why it had aired, and why the feed had not been cut.
“I expect answers to these questions without delay,” she said.
Meanwhile Dame Caroline Dinenage, chair of the culture, media and sport committee, has written to Mr Davie in relation to the corporation’s Glastonbury coverage.
The committee has said the letter asks about editorial and decision-making processes and whether consideration was given to broadcasting with a delay. It also asks about staffing levels at the festival and contingency planning.
Image: Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, has claimed there is a ‘problem of leadership’ at the BBC. File pic: PA
Avon and Somerset Police has begun a criminal investigation and is reviewing footage of both Bob Vylan and Kneecap’s performances at Glastonbury.
The force said a senior detective had been appointed – and it had been contacted by people from around the world.
“We… recognise the strength of public feeling,” it said.
During Kneecap’s set, one member suggested starting a “riot” outside his bandmate’s forthcoming court appearance, before clarifying that he meant “support”. Liam Og O hAnnaidh, also known as Mo Chara, is charged with a terror offence.
Image: Moglai Bap and Mo Chara of Kneecap performing at Glastonbury. Pic: Reuters
Bob Vylan had been due to tour the US before their visas were revoked.
US deputy secretary of state Christopher Landau said action had been taken “in light of their hateful tirade at Glastonbury, including leading the crowd in death chants”.
“Foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors to our country,” he added.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
During Bob Vylan’s set, the duo performed in front of a screen that showed several messages, including one that claimed Israel’s actions in Gaza amounted to “genocide”.
The war in Gaza began after Hamas militants attacked Israel on 7 October 2023 and killed 1,200 people and took about 250 hostage.
Israel’s offensive in Gaza has led to the deaths of more than 56,500 people, according to the Hamas-run health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilians and combatants.
Media watchdog Ofcom has said the BBC “clearly has questions to answer” over the live stream from Glastonbury.
A BBC spokesperson said: “The director-general was informed of the incident after the performance and at that point he was clear it should not feature in any other Glastonbury coverage.”
The broadcaster respects freedom of expression but “stands firmly against incitement to violence”, they said.
They added: “The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves…
“The team were dealing with a live situation, but with hindsight we should have pulled the stream during the performance. We regret this did not happen.”