“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 [ā¦] 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 [ā¦] 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. Itās 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 prime minister has refused to rule out manifesto-breaking tax hikes in next week’s budget while speaking to Sky News political editor Beth Rigby.
Sir Keir Starmer was interviewed by Rigby while the pair were in South Africa for a meeting of the G20 group of nations.
Despite the government last year indicating it was not going to raise more taxes, it appears that Wednesday’s fiscal event will involve substantial increases in levies.
The 2024 Labour manifesto said: “We will ensure taxes on working people are kept as low as possible.
“Labour will not increase taxes on working people, which is why we will not increase national insurance, the basic, higher, or additional rates of income tax, or VAT.”
At the start of their interview, the prime minister was asked by Rigby if it was important for politicians to “stick to their word”.
Sir Keir said: “Yes, it is important that politicians stick to their word.
More on Budget 2025
Related Topics:
“They have to make decisions against a political backdrop. And, we’ve also got big decisions to make in the budget that’s coming in just a few days time.”
This caveat matches the expectations that a range of taxes are going to be increased so the government can keep its spending pledges and increase its fiscal headroom amid worsening economic headwinds.
There was chaos last week after the increase in income tax that many had expected to be on the way was revealed to no longer be on the cards.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:20
Why has chancellor U-turned on income tax rises?
Asked specifically on the manifesto commitment on tax, Sir Keir told Rigby that decisions will be made “against a very difficult backdrop”.
In total, the prime minister refused 12 times to rule out tax rises.
He added it was “important to take the right decisions for our country”.
Rigby pointed out in the lead-up to the 2024 Budget, the prime minister was more unequivocal, saying income tax, national insurance and VAT would not all go up.
The prime minister declined to make the same promise, saying the decisions on tax will be announced on Wednesday.
However, Sir Keir said the budget will be guided by “principles”, including “fairness”.
The prime minister said the three areas he is “bearing down on” are the NHS, cutting national debt and dealing with the cost of living crisis.
One tax rise that has not been ruled out is what is known as a “stealth tax rise” of freezing income tax thresholds.
Rigby highlighted that in last year’s budget, Rachel Reeves said freezing thresholds will “hurt working people” – and asked the prime minister if he agreed.
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.
Sir Keir said: “We are going to set out our decisions.
“We will have absolutely in mind that the cost of living is the number one issue for people across the country.”
Pushed again, if working people will have their taxes increased, the prime minister instead mentioned he has people who are “struggling with the cost of living” in mind when making decisions.
Khurram Dara, a former policy lawyer at cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase, officially launched his campaign for New York State Attorney General.
In a Friday notice, Dara cited his āregulatory and policy experience, particularly in the crypto and fintech spaceā among his reasons to try to unseat Attorney General Letitia James in 2026.
The former Coinbase lawyer had been hinting since August at potential plans to run for office, claiming that James had engaged in ālawfareā against the crypto industry in New York.
Until July, Dara was the regulatory and policy principal at Bain Capital Crypto, the digital asset arm of the investment company. According to his LinkedIn profile, he worked as Coinbaseās policy counsel from June 2022 to January 2023 and was previously employed at the crypto companies Fluidity and Airswap.
James, who took office in 2019, has faced criticism from many in the crypto industry for filing lawsuits against companies on behalf of affected New Yorkers, including Genesis, KuCoin and NovaTech. Whoever assumes the role of New Yorkās attorney general would have significant discretion over whether to file charges against crypto companies.
Dara, who said he plans to run as a Republican, also echoed Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdaniās recent winning campaign, citing New Yorkersā concerns about the cost of living and affordability. Cointelegraph reached out to Dara for comment, but had not received a response at the time of publication.
The lawyer who represented XRP holders is also running for office again
As the deadline approached for candidates for various offices to announce their runs, former Massachusetts senatorial candidate John Deaton said he would try to unseat a Democrat again.Ā
Deaton ran against Senator Elizabeth Warren in 2024, losing by about 700,000 votes. On Nov. 10, however, he announced he would run as a Republican again, attempting to unseat Senator Ed Markey in 2026.
Deaton gained recognition in the crypto industry by advocating on behalf of XRP holders in the US Securities and Exchange Commissionās lawsuit against Ripple.
Like Dara, Deaton will be running in a race that largely favors Democrats: The last Republican to win a US Senate seat for Massachusetts was in 2010. Both candidates are expected to face competition in their respective Republican primaries.
The former leader of Reform UK in Wales has been sentenced to 10 and a half years after he admitted accepting tens of thousands of pounds in cash to make pro-Russian statements to the media and European Parliament.
Nathan Gill had “abused a position of significant authority and trust” and was “motivated by financial and political gain”, said Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb during remarks at the Old Bailey on Friday.
Image: Nathan Gill is surrounded by media as he arrives at the Old Bailey. Pic: PA
The Old Bailey heard his activities were linked to pro-Russian statements about Ukraine while he was a member of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) and subsequently the Brexit Party.
Following an investigation by counter-terrorism police, officers said they believe Gill likely took a minimum of £40,000 in cash and was offering to introduce other British MEPs so they could be bribed. Officers also said they believed some individuals in this case had a direct link to Vladimir Putin.
Image: Nathan Gill pleaded guilty to eight counts of bribery. Pic: Met Police
Prosecutor Mark Heywood KC previously told the court the bribery offences related to Gill’s association with pro-Russian Oleg Voloshyn, who had been a Ukrainian government official before 2014 and was sanctioned by the UK in 2022.
Gill’s activities emerged in WhatsApp messages after he was stopped at Manchester Airport on 13 September 2021.
He was about to board a flight to Russia to be an observer in elections there.
Bundles of cash recovered
Police said the messages revealed Voloshyn had tasked Gill to make pro-Russian statements on a reward basis. Counter-terrorism officers said the text of some speeches was provided to Gill, which he delivered almost word-for-word.
In other cases, he was paid to offer commentary to news outlets, such as the pro-Russian media organisation 112 Ukraine.
A search of his home in Wales also uncovered thousands in euros and dollars.
Image: Bundles of cash were recovered from Gill’s home. Pic: Met Police
Image: Pic: Met Police
Greed ‘primary motivation’
Commander Dominic Murphy, head of the Metropolitan Police Counter Terrorism Command, described Gill as being motivated by money.
“It appears… greed was his primary motivation. But I think there’s an element of him that had a pro-Russian stance as well, but only he can answer that question, to be honest with you, he never told us that.”
Image: Gill said no comment when interviewed by officers in 2022. Pic: Met Police
‘A grave betrayal of trust’
During sentencing, Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb described Gill’s offending as “sophisticated” and “a grave betrayal of the trust vested in you by the electorate”.
She told him: “You accepted payments from foreign nationals, made statements on important international matters at their behest, utilised scripted material presented as your own, and orchestrated the involvement of other MPs.
“Your misconduct has ramifications far beyond personal honour, which is now irretrievably damaged. It erodes public confidence in democracy when politicians succumb to financial inducement.”
Image: Gill was paid to offer commentary to pro-Russian media outlet, 112 Ukraine. Pic: Met Police
Other UK politicians at risk
Commander Murphy said that police were continuing to investigate other MEPs, including some from the UK.
“What we do know from the conversations with [Oleg] Voloshyn is that Nathan Gill actually offered his services to contact other MEPs, mostly UK MEPs, to also make statements that might be supportive of a Russian position in Ukraine,” he said.
He added: “I do believe that some of the individuals in this case do have direct connections to Vladimir Putin. And I have no doubt that if we were able to, we could follow this trail and it would lead straight to Moscow.”
Image: Commander Dominic Murphy believes greed was Gill’s primary motivation
Gill led the Welsh wing of UKIP between 2014 and 2016 and was a member of the Senedd between 2016 and 2017.
He was an MEP between 2014 and 2020, but left UKIP in 2019 to join Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party – later Reform UK.
Political fallout after prison term
Police have confirmed Nigel Farage has not been part of this investigation, but political rivals have called on the Reform UK leader to launch a thorough investigation.
Defence minister Al Carns, a former colonel in the Royal Marines, said Gill’s actions were “a disgrace”. He added: “I just think wherever we see Russian influence in UK politics, it’s got to be weeded out.”
Meanwhile, Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said “a traitor was at the very top of Reform UK”, referring to Gill, but also launched a direct attack on Mr Farage by calling him, and his party, “a danger to national security”.
“Nigel Farage himself was previously paid to be on Putin’s TV channel, Russia Today, and said he was the world leader he admires the most.
“We must all ask – where do his loyalties really lie? We need a full investigation into Russian interference in our politics,” he said.
Reform UK, which previously kicked Gill out of the party, said in a statement: “Mr Gill’s actions were reprehensible, treasonous and unforgivable. We are glad that justice has been served and fully welcome the sentence Nathan Gill has received.”
Liz Saville Roberts, Plaid Cymru’s Westminster leader, welcomed Gill’s jail sentence “for his acts of betrayal in taking bribes from Russia”.
In a statement, she said: “If the former Reform UK leader in Wales was part of a broader, co-ordinated effort to advance Moscow’s agenda within our democratic institutions, then the public deserves to know the full truth, and how far Russian money and influence reached into Nigel Farage’s inner circle.”