Alison Bennett MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 16 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Survivors’ Network supports all victims of sexual assault and abuse in Sussex. When my hon. Friend the Member for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller) and I met representatives of the network at the start of the month, they told us that, owing to the rising costs of national insurance contributions and inflation, £40,000 of its costs are now unfunded. Given the Government’s emphasis on driving down sexual violence, is this the right decision?

• 15 Dec 2025 · NHS: Winter Preparedness · Hansard source

  More

  Next week, families such as mine will be coming together across the generations to celebrate Christmas, and there will be a mix of people who have been vaccinated and those who have not, whether by choice or by default. Teenagers and young adults are struggling to access vaccinations, and they cannot walk into a pharmacy like an adult can. Is the Secretary of State content that everything is being done to ensure that if families want to get their young people vaccinated, they will be vaccinated in time for Christmas?

• 11 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I welcomed with interest the Minister’s earlier comments about support for the aviation sector. Let me give an example of how Brexit is damaging aviation in my constituency. CAE trains pilots, but at the moment it cannot bring in all the examiners it needs, so instead it has invested in Vienna. When will the Government decide that they need to join Lib Dem calls for a customs union?

• 9 Dec 2025 · Water Scarcity · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart. I thank my neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne), for securing this important and timely debate. Over the past week, my constituents in Mid Sussex have watched the appalling situation in Tunbridge Wells—families left without water for days on end, businesses forced to close and vulnerable residents unable to wash or cook—with deep concern. South East Water’s handling of the crisis has been nothing short of shocking. My constituents are asking the very reasonable question, “Could we be next?”. While we accept that climate change is affecting rainfall, and recognise that house building places additional pressure on supply, none of that excuses the simple truth: South East Water has failed to invest properly in its network, failed to maintain its pipes, and failed to plan to ensure resilience. We have also not seen a major new reservoir in England since 1991. In Mid Sussex, we are now seeing the consequences of that neglect. Ardingly reservoir is at 44% capacity—this time last year, it was full. We have had a hosepipe ban imposed since the summer, businesses have been restricted under a drought order and South East Water is now racing to design a 13-kilometre pipeline to move up to 30 million litres of water a day from Weir Wood reservoir, just to keep Haywards Heath and surrounding villages supplied next spring and summer. That is not resilience; they are chasing their tails. The pipeline proposal raises serious questions. Its route would cross private land, roads, railway lines and environmentally sensitive areas, including Ashdown Forest. Local people deserve clarity, they deserve transparency and they deserve independently verified information, not only on the feasibility of the pipeline, but on every contingency plan the company claims to be developing. I call on the Minister to go further. We need a full assessment of South East Water’s long-term resilience and investment strategy. We need clear, published forecasts of supply risks for every community and we also need regulators to ensure that companies owned by far-off investment funds are delivering water security, not just profits. Most of all, we need to protect our residents. Households, care homes, schools and businesses cannot simply be left to hope for rainfall or trust in last-minute engineering projects. My constituents expect—and deserve—reassurance that the disgraceful scenes in Tunbridge Wells will not be repeated in Haywards Heath, Burgess Hill, Lindfield, Cuckfield or anywhere else in Mid Sussex. It should be a given, especially with rising bills, that people can live safely in the knowledge that they have access to a clean, reliable water source. For a Government with massive housing targets, it is unreasonable to expect local people to support targets of more than 1,000 homes per annum that are being delivered when they know that the existing population’s water demands are, at best, precariously met. That breaks the social contract. I draw my comments to a close there, but I look forward to hearing how the Minister plans to ensure that the situation is better managed in the future.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Water Scarcity · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister support Liberal Democrat calls, including those of my hon. Friend the Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin), for the chief executive of South East Water to resign over this issue?

• 9 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T9. The Government seem set on pushing on with the family farm tax, despite opposition from the Liberal Democrats—and indeed from Labour Members. Will the Minister at least revisit the forestalling clause, which would help older farmers in Mid Sussex and across the country to avoid the consequences of backdating the legislation?

• 4 Dec 2025 · Local Elections · Hansard source

  More

  I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I am a district councillor. This is such a shambles. We have a local government sector on its knees as a result of decisions made by the Conservatives and, now, the Labour party. So much time and resource has been put into these mayoral elections by local government and officers over the past year; staff and venues for polling stations have already been booked. Does the Minister have any idea how much money has been spent on this over the past 12 months?

• 4 Dec 2025 · Seafarers’ Welfare · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reassurance. An issue too often overlooked while talking about seafarers is their mental health, as the right hon. Gentleman drew to our attention in his contribution. We know that life at sea can be tough, isolating, demanding and physically and psychologically draining: long stretches away from family, stress, exhaustion and the unique pressure of maritime work all take a heavy toll. Seafarers rely on the NHS for mental health support, just like anyone else, but our NHS is in crisis after years of Conservative neglect. Mental health waiting lists have spiralled, and thousands of people are waiting months, and sometimes years, for the care they urgently need. That includes the people who keep our essential maritime supply chain moving. Liberal Democrats believe that mental health must be treated with the same seriousness and urgency as physical health. That is why we are campaigning for regular mental health check-ups at key life points, just like blood pressure or eyesight checks. We are also calling for prescriptions for people with chronic mental health conditions to be free on the NHS, because we believe that no one should have to choose between treatment and financial strain. We will also create a statutory, independent mental health commissioner to advocate for patients and their families and carers. Those reforms matter for everyone, but are especially vital for communities such as seafarers, who often face some of the toughest working conditions. The P&O Ferries scandal was a turning point. It exposed deep flaws in our system—in employment law, in enforcement, and in the way that successive Governments have allowed bad employers to exploit loopholes at the expense of ordinary workers. It also presented us with a choice: to accept this broken system or to build something better. The Liberal Democrats would choose to build something better. We choose fair pay, safe working conditions and dignity at work. We choose an NHS that supports people’s mental health properly, not one that is forced to ration treatment. We choose an economy where responsibility, fairness and respect guide the way businesses operate. Britain can be better than P&O Ferries’ behaviour—and Britain must be better. I look forward to hearing from the Minister on how the Government aim to chart a course towards that destination.

• 4 Dec 2025 · Seafarers’ Welfare · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher. I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this important debate, and for setting out why this issue matters. Three years ago, the country watched in disbelief as P&O Ferries carried out one of the most disgraceful attacks on workers’ rights in recent memory: 800 loyal seafarers, men and women who had given years of dedicated service, were summarily dismissed over video call—no consultation, no notice and no dignity. It was a scandal that shocked the maritime sector. It shocked people across the country and it shocked people in Sussex communities, given that at Newhaven we have our much-treasured ferry service to Dieppe—thankfully not operated by P&O. From the moment that outrage unfolded, the Liberal Democrats were clear and principled. We demanded urgent answers from the Conservatives’ then Transport Secretary, Grant Shapps; we demanded justice for the workers and families whose lives had been thrown into turmoil; and we demanded a fundamental change to ensure that nothing like that could ever be allowed to happen again. Hard-working seafarers and their families should never suffer because of corporate neglect or corporate greed. In the months that followed, we pressed the Government to tighten the rules around how ships that are registered to operate in the UK treat their workers. We supported the Seafarers Wages Act 2023 as a necessary first step. It requires ships that make frequent calls at UK ports to pay at least the UK national minimum wage for time spent in our waters, but we also made it clear that the Act did not go far enough. We have championed the calls of maritime unions and the UK Chamber of Shipping for stronger safeguards: measures to stop companies engaging in port-hopping to dodge basic obligations; collectively agreed standards on roster patterns, pensions, crewing levels and training; and tougher enforcement so that operators cannot simply ignore the law with impunity. After all, laws mean very little if bad employers know that they can bend or dodge them entirely, and we now know exactly how determined some operators have been to do just that. In 2024, it was revealed that P&O’s replacement agency workers were being paid just £4.87 an hour—a shocking, exploitative wage that made a mockery of the protections that Parliament had tried to strengthen. Later, when the then Transport Secretary, the right hon. Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh), rightly described P&O Ferries as a “rogue operator”, the Prime Minister dismissed her concerns to protect a £1 billion investment by P&O Ferries’ Dubai-based parent company. Once again, workers’ rights were treated as secondary. Of course, public outrage did have consequences. In August 2025, Peter Hebblethwaite, the chief executive officer, who admitted to breaking consultation law, finally resigned. But accountability for one individual is not enough; we need systemic change. No worker, whether on land or at sea, should be discarded at the convenience of their employer. That brings me to the Employment Rights Bill, and in particular the provisions on fire and rehire. The Liberal Democrats welcome the parts of the Bill that strengthen protections for workers and curb the disgraceful practice of firing staff, only to rehire them on worse terms. Under the Bill’s provisions, dismissals will be deemed automatically unfair unless an employer can provide clear evidence of financial difficulty and show that changes were truly unavoidable. The Bill represents progress and it moves us in the right direction, but large parts of it are unfinished and critical details have been left to secondary legislation or promised consultations, including a long-awaited seafarers’ charter. That does not give workers or responsible employers the stability and certainty that they deserve. People whose livelihoods depend on those reforms should not have to cross their fingers and hope that the details are sorted out later. Unions are rightly concerned about carve-outs that may allow companies on the verge of collapse to bypass protections. We accept that businesses face genuine existential threats, and sometimes they need flexibility, but we must ensure that exceptions are not exploited by those who simply want to trim costs at the expense of their staff. Workers must not be treated as disposable. As the Bill gives Ministers new powers to implement international maritime conventions and a seafarers’ charter through secondary legislation, we must insist on ambitious and enforceable standards, including on maximum periods of work at sea and minimum periods of rest, as well as measures to manage fatigue, strong training requirements and protections that cover every seafarer who works in our waters. We need not just vague promises but real rules with real enforcement and consequences for those who break them.

• 4 Dec 2025 · Acquired Brain Injury Action Plan · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair this afternoon, Dame Siobhain. I sincerely thank the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) for securing this debate, for his thoughtful remarks and for his advocacy on this subject over many years. As we have heard, an acquired brain injury is an injury to the brain occurring after birth, often caused by a car accident, a fall or, as hon. Members have said, a sports incident. The consequences can be profound. Acquired brain injuries can alter movement, senses, memory, reasoning, personality and emotions. In other words, they can change the entire direction of a person’s life and the lives of their families and carers. Although the injury itself may often be sudden, the struggle that follows is not. For better or worse, it is shaped by the systems meant to support recovery. At present, those systems are failing far too many people. For years we have seen the same problems persisting: too little access to specialist rehabilitation, chronic workforce shortages, incomplete data, fragmented commissioning and Departments that do not work together. Those failings translate directly into poorer recoveries, greater long-term disability and immense emotional and financial strain on families and the economy. The NHS 10-year health plan committed to delivering effective rehabilitation in the community—a promise that was warmly welcomed, but it is frustratingly vague. We know that access to rehabilitation is central to enabling people with an ABI to live fulfilling, independent lives, and that rehabilitation works best when delivered by a skilled multidisciplinary team. Despite that, rehabilitation remains underfunded, understaffed and inconsistent across the country. Earlier this year, the UK Acquired Brain Injury Forum published a report that laid bare the scale of the challenge and the opportunities to tackle it. It is estimated that acquired brain injuries directly cost the UK economy £43 billion every year, while ABI-related wellbeing costs amount to £91.5 billion. Crucially, as the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr Brash) said, neuro-rehabilitation yields a remarkable 16:1 return on investment. The message is clear: investing in rehabilitation is not only the right thing to do morally, but one of the smartest decisions economically. Yet local capacity is shrinking when it should be expanding. Headway UK recently revealed that delays in receiving payments from local authorities and ICBs have had severe impacts on local brain injury services. My constituents in Mid Sussex are lucky enough to have Headway Sussex, which partners with brilliant local organisations such as Carers Support West Sussex. However, in the past two years alone, almost 10% of local Headway groups have been forced to close their doors. Each closure represents a community losing vital expertise and support. There has been some progress. In October 2025, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence published new guidance on rehabilitation for chronic neurological disorders, including ABI. The evidence underpinning that guidance showed what people with ABI have known for a long time: that many do not feel empowered to share feedback, that often rehabilitation is considered only once symptoms already affect daily life, and that people with acquired brain injuries typically need cycles of intensive treatment followed by lighter ongoing support. The new NICE standards set out clear minimum expectations across all health, mental health and social care settings, but they are just that—expectations. In July, in response to a written question from my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour), the Government confirmed their intention to publish an acquired brain injury action plan in autumn 2025. As the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings noted in his opening remarks, we are yet to see that plan. This follows years of long overdue commitments from the previous Conservative Government, who, having consulted in 2022, promised an ABI strategy back in 2024. People with an acquired brain injury should not have to wait any longer. My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I believe the Government must publish that action plan without delay, and it must include a commitment that every person with an acquired brain injury has access to a named GP. Continuity of care is essential and at the heart of Liberal Democrat policy, but our vision goes further. We are fighting for better social care for disabled people, including free personal care, more support for family carers, more respite breaks and paid carer’s leave. That would offer desperately needed stability to families who have been carrying the burden alone for too long. We would extend the right to flexible working to everyone and give every disabled person the right to work from home, unless there are compelling business reasons not to. We want people with an acquired brain injury to live not only independently, but with dignity and opportunity. To make that a reality, we would adopt new accessibility standards for public spaces, modernise the blue badge system and incorporate the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities into UK law. We would also introduce adjustment passports, ensuring that support and equipment stay with the person, not the employer, when someone changes jobs. Those are practical reforms, grounded in common sense. However, we simply cannot talk about acquired brain injuries without talking about the crisis in social care. People with long-term conditions such as an acquired brain injury often have the most complex needs, yet they are among those suffering the most from the failings of the system. Hundreds of thousands of people are waiting for care, and many are stranded in hospital beds because the support they need simply does not exist in the community. In my time since being elected, I have heard that from constituents in Mid Sussex. The situation is bad not only for those individuals, but for the NHS, and it is disastrous for the taxpayer. The Liberal Democrats would fix the back door of the NHS by introducing free personal care based on the successful Scottish model, creating a social care workforce plan, establishing a college of care workers, raising the carers’ minimum wage and ensuring that unpaid carers get the respite breaks and financial support they deserve and need. The Liberal Democrats would reverse the increase in national insurance contributions and invest directly in community nursing. We would create an independent pay review body, implement a 10-year retention plan and expand access to flexible working and childcare. We would reduce reliance on expensive agency staffing by rebuilding a flexible and sustainable NHS workforce. People with acquired brain injuries and their families and carers deserve better. Our country, which bears the enormous economic and social cost of inaction, deserves better too. It is time for the Government to act, so I look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say today.

• 2 Dec 2025 · Criminal Court Reform · Hansard source

  More

  I am hoping that, for the avoidance of doubt, the Justice Secretary can rule out any changes to inquests with a jury, which are required when the deceased has been detained by the state. These inquests are also subject to agonising delays for bereaved families. Given those delays, what plans does he have to address backlogs in the coroner’s court?

• 1 Dec 2025 · Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund · Hansard source

  More

  10. What assessment she has made of the adequacy of the adoption and special guardianship support fund.

• 1 Dec 2025 · Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund · Hansard source

  More

  Alison Roy is a constituent of mine. She is a therapist and works with adopted children. Last week, she drew to my attention the BBC Radio 4 programme “File on 4” on the impact and state of adoption, which highlighted that more than 1,000 adopted children have been returned to care in the past five years. Does the Minister think that per-child cuts to the ASGSF will help or hinder keeping children with their adoptive families?

• 26 Nov 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q2. University Hospitals Sussex currently has 350 people well enough to go home, but occupying beds. That is the same number of beds as in Princess Royal hospital in Haywards Heath in my constituency. The reason they cannot go home is that there is no social care package for them to go on to. This is terrible for them, puts strain on the trust and is ruinous to the taxpayer. Given that there is no urgent plan to reform social care, what is the Prime Minister’s plan to bring them home for Christmas?

• 25 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am interested in how far the hon. Gentleman would propose to go. Would he advocate the abolition for the Mayor of London?

• 25 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 25 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My amendment 34 is simple but vital. It would strengthen the ability of all our communities not only to bid for assets of community value but to make informed, responsible decisions when doing so. At present, communities have a right to bid, yet, absurdly, no guaranteed right to view. We ask our town and parish councils to act as prudent stewards of public money, to conduct surveys, to secure financing and to follow proper decision-making processes, yet we deny them the basic opportunity to inspect the very asset they may be committing taxpayer funds to purchase. This is impractical, illogical and unreasonable. A recent case in my constituency of Mid Sussex illustrates the problem well. Hurstpierpoint and Sayers Common parish council sought to bid for a former church building listed as an asset of community value. I can attest to the value that this building had for the community, because when my children were tiny, they went there during the week. It served as their pre-school and I must say that Cottis pre-school was and still is a wonderful facility, led by Sam. I am still grateful to the staff there for their support and the best start they gave my children. Throughout the six-month moratorium, despite repeated requests, the parish council was refused access to the building. Only after the moratorium ended, when the property was placed in an auction, did the auction house permit inspections. This left the council with just two weeks to carry out surveys, complete its internal procedures and secure public works loan board financing. No responsible authority could compress such due diligence into that timeframe. Predictably, the parish council was unable to bid, and the building—an asset that it could have afforded, based on the eventual sale price—has now passed into private ownership and been converted into flats, removing a much-needed community venue from village ownership. My amendment 34 would correct that oversight. It would simply guarantee that community buyers had an early and fair opportunity to view an asset so that they could undertake proper due diligence. It would impose no unreasonable burden on vendors. It would merely ensure a level playing field. If we believe in empowering communities, and if we believe that assets of community value should genuinely remain available to those communities, we must give them the practical tools to act. A right to bid without a right to view is a hollow promise. I urge the Minister to support this amendment and give our councils and the communities they serve a fair chance to preserve the places that matter most to them.

• 24 Nov 2025 · Ministerial Code · Hansard source

  More

  As my hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan) said, dealing with the Department of Health and Social Care over the past year or so has been an exercise in opacity. One thing that we have struggled with has been the 50% cuts to NHS integrated care boards. That has left hon. Members from across the House having to piece together the facts from the media. Will the Minister confirm to Members which NHS services will lose funding to pay for the £1 billion redundancies that the Government’s reorganisation has created?

• 20 Nov 2025 · Unpaid Carers: Inequalities · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with the hon. Lady’s comments. Unpaid carers, who are the focus of Carers Rights Day, do remarkable, difficult and emotionally demanding work every single day. They do it out of love, without recognition and, too often, without the support or rights that they deserve or should have access to. As the spokesperson on care and carers for my party, this is something I say a lot, but it bears repeating: unpaid carers are the backbone of Britain’s care system. There are 5.7 million carers across the UK, and together they provide care worth an estimated £162 billion every year—almost the size of the entire NHS budget. For that to be the case, however, they make huge sacrifices. Every single day, 600 people leave their job to care for someone they love. If carers are expected to shoulder that vast responsibility, they must have rights. Those rights must be well known and easy to access, and must make a meaningful difference to carers’ lives. Today is about making sure people know and use their rights. I am proud that my colleague and hon. Friend the Member for North East Fife changed the law with her Carer’s Leave Act 2023, which secured the right to unpaid time off work for carers. That legislation was an enormous step forward for the almost 2 million employees who balance work and caring responsibilities. I am also proud that Liberal Democrat campaigning helped to secure an increase in the carer’s allowance earnings limit in last year’s Budget, easing pressure on people who want to remain in work while caring. I recently tabled the Unpaid Carers (Respite and Support) Bill, which would guarantee regular respite breaks for unpaid carers—something that is not readily accessible across the country. There is much more to do, however, and unpaid carers face inequalities on all fronts. On gender, women become carers earlier and more frequently than men, are more likely to provide care and more likely to work in part-time and lower-paid roles. On employment, carers face barriers to remaining in paid work, with large numbers reducing their hours or leaving their jobs. On health and wellbeing, caring drives significant and preventable health inequalities, with high rates of long-term conditions, worsening physical and mental health, difficulty accessing support, and greater impacts for women and those providing the most hours. On poverty, there are currently 1.2 million unpaid carers in poverty and 400,000 in deep poverty, who struggle financially due to low carer’s allowance, a reduced ability to work and a complex benefits system. Young carers face substantial disadvantages in terms of education and future opportunities. Those spending more than 35 hours a week caring are far less likely to gain a degree or enter employment. That is why the Liberal Democrats want unpaid carers to have real financial support, including an increase of £20 a week in the carer’s allowance to bring it to £103.30. In next week’s Budget, should the Chancellor be minded to increase the minimum wage, I sincerely hope that carer’s allowance will be pegged to that increase. We also want a review of the requirement of 35 hours’ care per week, which too often forces carers to make impossible choices. Critically, we want a taper on the earnings limit so that, if a carer’s earnings go above the limit even by a few pence, they do not immediately lose all their carer’s allowance. That is plain common sense. It is precisely because there is no such taper that the carer’s allowance overpayment scandal has been allowed to happen, with horrendous consequences for thousands of carers. Carers deserve better. They deserve respect, they deserve support and they deserve rights that they can rely on and easily exercise. Carers Rights Day reminds us that rights are powerful only if people know they have them and feel able to use them. Too many carers do not know what they are entitled to; too many assume that support is not for them and too many are simply too overwhelmed to navigate unnecessarily complicated systems. That is why fantastic organisations such as Carers UK and Carers Trust are vital. They look out and speak up for these extraordinary carers to whom we owe so much. On this Carers Rights Day, I close by echoing the words of the Princess of Wales, who urged us this week to restore “the dignity to the quiet, often invisible work of caring…as we look to build a happier, healthier society.”

• 20 Nov 2025 · Unpaid Carers: Inequalities · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I thank the hon. Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) not only for securing this important debate on Carers Rights Day, but for all her work championing carers since her election to Parliament. I welcome yesterday’s publication of the terms of reference of the employment rights for unpaid carers review, which suggests that the Government are looking in the right direction. However, as my hon. Friend the Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) noted, the pace is not as fast as it could be—it has already been going a year—and the period of consultation may actually be too short, given the demands that carers and the people who support them face, as everybody in this Chamber understands. I hope this review will usher in paid carer’s leave, as it would make the biggest difference for those on the lowest wages, who cannot currently afford to take unpaid carer’s leave. This year, the theme of Carers Rights Day is, “Know your rights, use your rights”. It is all about making sure, as hon. Members have noted, that the millions of unpaid carers who support loved ones through illness and disability, know that they have access to support and rights, such as carer’s assessments, carer’s leave and hospital discharge support. In my Mid Sussex constituency and across the UK, hundreds of thousands of people are waiting for social care. Many are stranded in hospital beds simply because the support they need in the community is not there, which in turn puts immense strain on our already creaking NHS. That is why my Liberal Democrat colleagues and I are campaigning so passionately for a social care system that values care users, supports care workers and, crucially, recognises the millions of unpaid carers who quietly keep this country going. The hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns) set out her frustrations, which we share, with the pace of the Casey review. It is worth noting that only one cross-party meeting has happened since the Secretary of State announced that review in January, and a second meeting has not yet been convened. Can the Minister advise us when we can expect to secure a second meeting?

• 20 Nov 2025 · Unpaid Carers: Inequalities · Hansard source

  More

  I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend’s excellent point. It is regrettable that there seems to be only one person that the Government like to call on to do very important work across a number of different areas.

• 20 Nov 2025 · Passenger Rail: Performance Improvements · Hansard source

  More

  21. What recent assessment she has made of the adequacy of passenger rail performance.

• 20 Nov 2025 · Passenger Rail: Performance Improvements · Hansard source

  More

  My Mid Sussex constituents are frustrated by the number of cancellations, particularly on Thameslink services. One of the reasons for those cancellations is driver shortages; in particular, sickness rates are running at 15% to 20%. The operator has told me that it is now paying private healthcare providers, because NHS waiting lists are so long. Does the Minister think that is good use of my rail users’ fares, and will he make representations to colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care, to make them aware that this is happening?

• 17 Nov 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  I agree wholeheartedly. The MHRA workforce has been cut by 40%, and that has slowed down the arrival of new therapies for people who desperately need them. We should be halving the time it takes for new treatments to reach patients, not lengthening it. None of this is impossible. It requires us to listen to people living with Parkinson’s—really listen to their fears, needs, hopes and experiences. The Parky charter sets out a clear and achievable path. It demands dignity and fairness, and that the Government finally deliver the timely, specialist, compassionate care that every person with Parkinson’s—like Sophie’s mum, Janet—should be able to count on. Today, let us send a message to everyone living with Parkinson’s: we see you; we hear you; and we stand with you. I want to send an equally clear message to the Government and the Minister, whom I thank for being here today: the time for half measures and for excuses is over. The time to act—seriously, decisively and with compassion—is now.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  I am happy to agree. My hon. Friend makes an excellent point, and it also applies to the loved ones of people receiving a Parkinson’s diagnosis. We need better social care for all people when they are faced with a disability. We need there to be more respite breaks, paid carer’s leave and a system that recognises the specific needs of people with neurological conditions. On work—here I am thinking in particular of my friend Rob, whom many of my hon. Friends will also know—we must ensure that people who have Parkinson’s and are of working age can live and work and participate in work with independence and dignity wherever possible. That is why my Liberal Democrat colleagues and I are fighting for a new right to flexible working, and the right to work from home for every disabled person unless there is a significant business reason otherwise. The Liberal Democrats also want to adopt a new accessibility standard for public spaces and embed in UK law the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. We want to ensure that support moves with the person and does not just stay with the original employer. That is why we are calling for adjustment passports—records of the modifications, equipment and adjustments that a disabled person uses—so that when they change jobs, their support goes with them. That seems to be plain common sense. On medicines and their availability, we must speed up access to new treatments. It is simply unacceptable that the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency has seen its workforce cut.