GK Strategy is pleased to share its ‘Health Policy Spotlight’ report which sets out some of the key health policy trends to watch out for in 2025 as we look ahead to the government’s eagerly anticipated 10-Year Health Plan.
The report can be accessed here: Health Policy Spotlight – GK Strategy – March 2025
At the end of January, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Wes Streeting delivered the government’s 2025 mandate to NHS England. This is a crucial document which sets out the health secretary’s goals for the health service over the next 12 months. It also provides all-important detail about the government’s emerging views on reform of the health and social care system ahead of the much-anticipated 10-Year Health Plan, due to be published later this year – likely in June or July.
The findings of Lord Darzi’s investigation into the health service, commissioned and published in the weeks immediately following Labour’s general election victory, have unsurprisingly been hugely influential in shaping the development of Streeting’s inaugural mandate to NHS England. The health secretary has said the mandate will help address the urgent challenges identified by the Darzi investigation and includes a ‘sharp focus on improving efficiency and productivity.’ Streeting again warns that the ‘culture of routine overspending without consequences’ is over.
At the heart of the 2025 mandate are three key aims: reducing waiting times, improving access to primary care, and improving urgent and emergency care. To reduce waiting times, Streeting has said he is refocusing the NHS on making progress towards an 18-week standard, whereby 92% of patients wait no longer than 18 weeks from referral to treatment, which will work in tandem with the steps set out in the government’s Elective Reform Plan published earlier this year. Patient choice is also at the heart of this agenda. The mandate emphasises the importance of implementing a cultural shift in the NHS to prioritise the patient experience in reducing waiting times, including through the use of the private sector to enable greater patient control over their treatment.
Improving access to primary care is the second key aim of the mandate. This mirrors one of the three strategic shifts the health secretary wants to see as a result of his reform agenda: shifting more treatment from hospitals to communities. Streeting is clear that primary care services are the front door to the health service but for too many people it is not possible to get a timely appointment, if at all. The mandate requires NHS England to enable patients to access general practice more quickly and tackle ‘unwarranted’ variation in services provided by general practice.
Improving urgent and emergency care is the mandate’s third aim. The mandate labels ambulance response times and waiting times in A&E as ‘unacceptable’. While the health secretary recognises that transforming these services will take time, he does state that a start must be made ahead of the government publishing its strategy to improve urgent and emergency care later this year. The mandate therefore includes a specific focus on reducing long wait times to improve patient safety, experience and outcomes.
The ambitions set out by Streeting in his first mandate are laudable. The bleak fiscal situation means the health secretary will have a hawk-like focus on monitoring performance against budgets. This is in recognition that the uptick in funding that the Department of Health and Social Care received at the October budget is unlikely to point to further significant cash injections in the immediate future. For providers, it also underscores the importance of positioning themselves as a high-quality, value for money partner to ICBs and NHS Trusts in delivering strong outcomes for patients.
If you would like to discuss the 2025 NHS mandate in more detail and what it means for businesses in the sector, then please contact Hugo Tuckett (hugo@gkstrategy.com) or Arth Malani (arth@gkstrategy.com).
The health secretary has warned he will “steamroll” the food and drink industry by launching a new plan to tackle obesity. In an interview with The Guardian setting out his priorities for the year, he said the move is part of a broader focus on preventing ill health rather than simply treating it. The plan is being worked up across government departments and the sector will soon be invited to feed into a consultation process.
Is this political rhetoric indicative of a heavier-handed approach to public health than under the previous iterations of government? Our gut instinct is yes, but proof of the pudding will be in the government’s response to the Soft Drink Industry Levy (SDIL) review. Launched last October, health and treasury ministers are considering revisions to the existing sugar content thresholds, including increasing the scope to milk-based and milk substitute products, and the levy rates.
Although the SDIL is widely considered to be a successful and effective policy intervention, the UK’s sugar consumption remains significantly above recommended levels, especially among children. By lowering the sugar thresholds and widening the scope of products, more soft drink producers will be impacted by regulations and will be forced to either reformulate products or see their production costs increase. The review will be completed in the spring with changes enacted in the 2025 Budget, so producers should be closely following policy developments throughout the course of this year. The government’s response to the review will set the mood music for the National Food Strategy so this is a crunch point for all those in the sector, not just soft drinks producers.
Beyond the health merits for cracking down on sugar content, there are political and economic factors at play. Politically, the Prime Minister insists that 2025 is a year of delivery after a slow and difficult start to his tenure. Further state intervention in food and drink markets in the name of public health would play to a large section of the labour backbenchers. Party morale is likely to be put to the test in the coming months as the nation’s economic woes continue. This is where HM Treasury comes into the picture; amid turbulent financial markets and disappointing economic growth, the Comprehensive Spending Review will be an uncomfortable experience for the Chancellor and her team. Raising revenue from the levy could ease some of the pressures that will undoubtedly fall on the schools budget, which the levy supports.
For industry there is a fine balance to strike. Full resistance to public health reform would be counterproductive and leaves a bad taste in the mouths of consumers. Developing and maintaining an open, constructive dialogue with government, including showcasing innovative reformulations, will be a far more effective approach. Framed in this way, industry will be able to better make the case that a proportionate approach to SDIL and wider reforms will deliver positive health and economic change.
If you would like to discuss the sugar levy and the government’s public health agenda in more detail, please contact GK Associate Director David Mitchell at: david.mitchell@gkstrategy.com
In September 2024, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Wes Streeting labelled the state of maternity services in England a ‘cause for national shame’, describing it as one of the ’biggest issues that keeps him awake at night’.
His comments followed the publication of a damning report by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) which brought together findings from 131 inspections and found that almost half of maternity units inspected were rated as ‘requires improvement’ or ‘inadequate’. The report called for increased national action and ring-fenced investment into services, warning that poor quality NHS maternity care will become normalised if action is not taken.
In January 2024, the APPG on Birth Trauma launched an inquiry to investigate the factors in maternity care that contribute to birth trauma and develop policy recommendations. By May, the APPG’s report, Listen to Mums: Ending the Postcode Lottery on Perinatal Care, presented findings from over 1,300 submissions by women recounting harrowing stories of inadequate and traumatic care. The report identified an overwhelming narrative that women felt belittled, ignored, and neglected at a time when they were most vulnerable, and concluded that a base standard in maternity services is needed across the UK.
Streeting has inherited a bleak forecast: urgent need for reform; mounting pressures on the NHS as a whole; and a poor fiscal climate. So where does Labour go from here?
Labour’s 2024 election manifesto promised to ensure that NHS trusts failing on maternity care are ‘robustly supported into rapid improvement’, to train thousands more midwives as part of the NHS Workforce Plan, and to set an explicit target to close the black and Asian maternal mortality gap.
However, the party’s manifesto lacked any concrete policies aimed at fixing the broken maternity system. This means all eyes now turn to the government’s 10-Year Health Plan, due to be published in spring this year, as the potential roadmap for change.
While the plan will focus on prevention, the transition from hospital to community care, and the digitalisation of health services, the government has given no indication of whether it will give maternal health the attention it desperately needs.
Despite rising demand, current services are stretched and under-resourced, meaning many women face significant delays receiving the support they need, if they receive it at all. Investing in early intervention, services that understand the needs of new and expectant mothers, and workforce growth is essential to ensuring that patients can access timely and effective support.
Various campaign groups are putting pressure on Streeting to make improving maternal health services a priority. The Maternal Mental Health Alliance is calling for all parties to demonstrate their support for new and expectant mothers. The Alliance claims ‘there is a vital opportunity for the new government to create positive change for current and future generations.’
The 10-Year Health Plan provides the government with the opportunity to address the alarming findings from both the CQC and APPG on Birth Trauma, restore public confidence in NHS maternity services, and show its commitment to fixing the systemic issues within maternal care. Inadequate support has devastating effects on families and adds huge costs to the UK economy, meaning it is vital that organisations engage with the government during the development of the 10-Year-Health Plan to ensure maternity services receive the focus they need. By leveraging industry platforms and policy development support, advocacy campaigns can emphasise the importance of maternal health and the challenges faced by women.
To discuss the government’s plans for maternal health in more detail, please contact Annabelle Black at annabelle@gkstrategy.com.
Around two million adults and children are currently stuck on NHS waiting lists seeking mental health support. NHS England estimates the cost of untreated mental health to the UK economy to be £117.9 billion every year, taking into account those who are unfit to work because of their condition. Previous administrations have attempted to address this issue, in particular former Prime Minister Theresa May’s commissioning of the Wessely Review, but seemingly little substantive progress has taken place.
In opposition, Labour’s journey to office set off to a questionable start on mental health. The Party’s dedicated shadow mental health minister Rosena Allin-Khan resigned in September 2023 citing Starmer’s decision to remove the mental health portfolio from the shadow cabinet.
Since then, the Party has made no secret of its intention to overhaul what has been described as a mental health system in crisis. Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer vowed in his Party’s manifesto to reform and modernise the outdated Mental Health Act 1983, recruit 8,500 new mental health staff, and place mental health professionals in schools. Seven months on from Labour’s landslide general election victory, how can progress be described?
In the King’s Speech, the government brought forward the Mental Health Bill which seeks to address unnecessary detentions for people with a learning disability or autism and end the use of criminal justice cells to detain those who need care under the Mental Health Act. Ministers have said that the Bill, which is currently being scrutinised in the House of Lords, will ensure that all patients have a care and treatment plan tailored to their needs.
In addition, the autumn budget committed £26 million of investment in new mental health crisis centres to help ease pressure on A&E departments. This is due to the increase in patients presenting in hospitals because of a lack of accessible mental health services.
While these initial measures are targeted at the most severe and urgent cases of poor mental health, the government’s wider ambition for mental health looks to incorporate its overarching focus on health prevention. The government’s 10-year health plan, due to be published in spring 2025, will be underpinned by “treatment to prevention” as a core pillar. It is also likely to contain further details on how mental health prevention will be included within this shift towards preventative care.
There is evident cross-party support for improving mental health services, and parties of all colours recognise the devastating impact that maintaining the status quo will have, both on individuals and wider society.
The Liberal Democrat-chaired Health and Social Care Select Committee announced in December 2024 the launch of a new inquiry into community mental health services. This is likely to reveal further improvements required in the system which will help shape the government’s approach to reform.
It is vital that providers and businesses engage with the committee’s inquiry which will be vital in shaping the development of policy in this area. The government must get mental health care right if it hopes to see any pressure on the NHS reduced or make a dent in the ever-growing list of workers signed off due to long-term sickness.
Mark Field, director and founder of Prof Consulting Group, outlines what investors need to know about packaging in the food and drink sector
Setting the scene
Food and drink packaging is undergoing major transformation with innovations at each stage of the value chain. By responding to regulatory, consumer, and supply chain challenges, companies are finding new ways to reach customers and help them shop more sustainably. The role of packaging is to keep food and drink intact, safe and fresh along its journey from producer to consumer. It provides a space to communicate information to customers and to represent a brand. Carefully managed, it is a window to showcase a company’s values, but poor execution risks significant brand damage.
Shifts in the regulatory and commercial landscape
Regulation – responding to concerns about environmental pollution and climate breakdown, the regulatory landscape is shifting to place responsibility on producers for the packaging they put into the market.
In Europe, the upcoming PPWR is part of the region’s circular economy plan to value waste and minimise its environmental impact. The new regulation updates existing rules and aims to harmonise how packaging is managed throughout EU countries, making trade smoother. PPWR will require all countries to increase the share of reusable packaging which includes deposit return schemes, targets, economic incentives and minimum percentages of reusable packaging. In addition, 70% of all packaging by weight must be recycled by 2030. For some companies this might mean investing in new packaging equipment to handle new materials, for example, in the transition from plastic to paper. For others it can mean an entirely new way of selling, such as using returnable glass jars instead of plastic pots.
Nations in the UK are considering (England) or have implemented (Wales) deposit return schemes where consumers return packaging to a retail outlet and receive money back. This requires investment into infrastructure such as reverse vending machines. Others are working with digital technology to trace their products through the recycling system starting with the home curb side collection and rewarding customers who participate.
The UK’s plastic packaging tax charges a flat rate per tonne of plastic packaging with less than 30% recycled plastic. Companies must ensure they have accurate information on the packaging they buy to submit data to a government register.
Communication on packaging sustainability must be accurate and not mislead consumers according to the upcoming EU Green Claims Directive and the UK’s existing CMA’s Green Claims Code. One of the goals is to ensure that consumers are empowered to participate in the circular economy and can make informed choices. Consumers and NGOs are alert to greenwashing and don’t hesitate to call out companies who overstep the line.
A new UN treaty to regulate the production and disposal of plastic is expected at the end of 2024. Brands are calling for a limit to the amount of virgin plastic produced and for support on recycling and reuse systems.
Consumers – people expect companies to ensure their packaging is sustainable and research shows they want to participate in the transformation. According to global surveys, recycling packaging is the most popular sustainable behaviour, practiced by 62% of people. Companies can respond to these needs with clear and accurate disposal communication and with innovation in packaging formats.
Supply chains – extracting raw materials places undue pressure on natural resources and creates pollution that worsens climate and nature breakdown. Reducing the extraction of virgin raw materials, such as oil and timber, is urgent. Food and drink companies can limit their contribution to these challenges and take the opportunity to strengthen their resilience in the face of shortages and rising costs. UK and EU packaging leaders are moving from efficiency and lightweighting towards new materials, recyclable and recycled, and reusable packaging formats. For example, alcoholic drinks companies are experimenting with infinitely recyclable aluminium instead of glass, and being lighter, the product has fewer transport emissions.
Risks and opportunities
Companies who are unable to understand or keep pace with regulatory changes face increased costs resulting from levies on non-recyclable packaging, fines for misleading green claims and increased costs of excess packaging. Evidence shows that if customers are disappointed, companies will lose sales.
However, leading companies in the sector are embracing the transformation and innovating across the value chain. For example, with smart packaging technology using freshness tags; using alternative materials to plastic such as seaweed coatings and mushroom fibre cushioning; and using more reusable and refillable packaging. Infrastructure to support circularity is also growing, with refill stations, mobile and fixed reverse vending machines, and scanning and tracking technology increasingly prevalent. Cameras and cloud-based systems can be used to enable traceability and visibility over each process involved in collecting, recycling and cleaning packaging.
Companies that can promote and support convenient sustainable living will succeed in today’s crowded market. Many value-driven brands are entering the market and winning customers on this basis.
What should investors be asking?
Investors who want to understand the sustainability of packaging used by food and drink businesses should be asking management teams the following questions:
Prof Consulting Group helps to lead business to success in the UK and Australian food industry with its team of industry-leading experts and extensive range of services. For more information or to discuss how Prof. Consulting Group can support your business, please visit https://www.profcg.com/contact/